I’ve signaled my vote in favor or this proposal. I’m of the opinion that delegate incentives in some form are necessary for the long term viability of the DAO, for the simple reason that we should not reasonably expect long term active and thoughtful participation from unpaid labor. I think that regarding the growth in delegated votes / continued participation during periods without incentives, “past performance is not indicative of future results”; in fact, given the ongoing proposals of incentive programs — including occasional suggestions of retroactive rewards — it seems plausible that a not-insignificant amount of voting / forum activity has been motivated by the hope/expectation of some such program being put in place eventually.
While I think much of the feedback and criticism has been valuable, I don’t see any of it as decisive and believe that blocking the proposal would be a case of letting perfect be the enemy of the good (presuming one believes having an some form of incentive program is worthwhile to begin with). E.g.,
- Concerns about spam / AI-slop forum posts are valid, but this is ultimately unpreventable. Given that this requirement likely won’t make a major difference in either direction (as discussed, we’d expect to see active forum participation regardless), I believe that all things equal this requirement is a positive one to nudge things in the direction of transparency. I would trust OpCo with the authority to judge cases of obvious, egregious abuse and withhold rewards accordingly.
- Questions around the cadences of snapshots can be fairly easily clarified, and AFAICT, no option should impose any significant administrative overhead.
Etc.
Some suggested modifications that were brought up (namely by @blockful / @Zeptimus / @cp0x ) that I would support:
- 200K seems like an unnecessarily high minimum voting power, and could even perversely incentivize consolidation where we’d rather encourage more independent voters; I’d support including a lower tier either in this program or a separate one.
- Vesting schedule for rewards (as per @Zeptimus ).
Overall, I believe that this proposal is a good starting point and improvement over prior incentive programs with its emphasis on simplicity and objective criteria. Affirming my support.