DAO participation incentives

Hi everyone,

I would like to discuss one of the offshoots that emerged from our discussion regarding vMETA/cMETA listing. That is the topic of DAO participation incentives.

At the moment, I believe there are not enough incentives in place for vMETA holders to actively participate in DAO decision-making. I fear going forward many people will sit on their vMETA tokens without actively using them to participate in the DAO. Not only does this inflate the vote of active members, but it generally bodes poorly for creating a rich and vibrant discussion on future investments.

I think we should come up with some schemes that properly align incentives and lead to more active particpation.

Some ground rules I believe we should follow:

  1. Participation should be decision outcome neutral. Users should not be led to vote with the heard, follow votes of whales or what is most likely to pass.
  2. Rewards should only be distributed to active participants, so they should not be possible to be earned passively.
  3. Rewards should not come at any material cost to cMETA holders.

My first thought would be to align rewards with the number of decisions a wallet has voted on. This should be not be impacted by how much vMETA you voted with. (I can already imagine a problem here is that people will just vote with many separate wallets, dividing their vMETA.)

As for what the reward should be I’m not quite sure. Issuing vMETA/cMETA would be dilutive towards other members and probably not a good idea unless it is just a token amount. At which point people might not care.

Another option, which I personally would like - is to mint and then issue some simple NFTs. Perhaps each DAO decision would have their own numbered NFT. Decision 1 NFT, Decision 2 NFT. You earn them by voting on the respective proposals. After proposals are settled the non-issued NFTs are burned. This would be a neat memorabilia and badge of honor. Early decision NFTs might even gain some value down the line.

My point is, I don’t necessarily think rewards need to be monetary in nature. We just need to put in place some gamification.

Anyway happy to discuss other thoughts!

I think it could be interesting having separate yes and a no NFT per vote. You would not be able to see the NFT until after the vote in order to make people vote based on the issue and not decide based on NFT looks.

Thanks @PorcoRosso for bringing this up. I 100% agree that any incentive should not be in form of cMETA/vMETA that might dilute existing holders.

The idea of NFT for voting is super cool, we can even think of unlocking “trophies” by burning say 10 “simple vote” NFT.

Will discuss internally about feasibly. A possible issue is that we are currently using the official SPL governance maintained by Solana Labs (indeed you should see a similar governance as ours if you go to the Mango governance, as they use the same). This is great because it means it’s maintained by the best minds in the street + it’s much safer than if we wrote it ourselves.

At the same time this comes at a small cost in terms of flexibility (i.e. if we change too much we might not be able to upgrade smoothly as they introduce new features).

So the options could be to check with the SPL Governance guys if that’s something they would like to do (@solbricklayer let’s discuss), or build something “on top” ourselves. Either way I guess it would not be something of 1-2 weeks but likely a bit more

1 Like

Hey guys here i am sorry for the late reply. I think that from a technical point of view we can totally do that.

My only concern or better saying point for discussion is if the NFT will be enough to stimulate a more active participation. More in detail, I agree with what @PorcoRosso stated that “I don’t necessarily think rewards need to be monetary in nature.” but i think on the other hand that if people don’t perceive the value of the NFT itself it may end up in being worthless (a case that i was looking at is the NFTs that Buildspace is giving out for being part of the community, which are trading for almost 0 on opensea as they are not art but some simple icons).

Just a random idea to overcome this (open to any feedback) is to take few $k to pay an artist and do a whole collection of NFTs that we give out just for community engagement → this would give something nice and with some art/value component (ofc it’s not Bansky but still something more than me drawing on Canva :slight_smile: ) and on the other hand the “dilution” is basically nothing (few ks in a fund of 5M).

Functionally I would think the simplest would be to render all the NFTs at once. A few hundred/thousand per proposal. (It doesn’t cost more to mint a larger amount of NFTs right?). At the end of each vote a smart contract distributes them to voters and burns the remaining ones for that round.
They might gain some value as time goes on, and as the project grows the earlier ones become more rare in comparison. Though it’s not really clear to me who would buy them, since that feels like cheating.

Redeeming votes for trophies is another option, but I would struggle with how long to hold them to buy different tiers of trophies, personally.

I see there are already some tools online to algorithmically generate NFTs, or we could hire an artist. Or even hold a competition?

Lastly I think we shouldn’t just go on this path towards incentivization? Does anyone have any completely different ideas? Maybe a participant “hall of fame” on the metacollective site? We should look for some ideas in the DAO space.

on this, NFT minting is at NFT level (i think currently $2 per unit, but this is a rough estimate as the price depends on the weight of the file itself to be hosted on the blockchain). From a “value” point of view, I would personally avoid to flood the market with a huge number of NFTs (also bc it creates a super strong sell pressure as basically the NFT is given out for free and there is little incentive to sell it higher). Also, from an operational point of view creating one NFT per vote would be quite complex