by 0x247e0896706bb09245549e476257a0a1129db418 (coalition)
SUMMARY
The proposal aims to rethink the DAO Delegation and Voting system to reward community engagement and increase accountability, representation. This could include introducing a dedicated, separate Delegates-Voters section on the governance website, establishing incentives and rewards and creating a structured framework for Delegates areas of responsibilities within Decentraland DAO.
MOTIVATION
Current delegation and voting system can be limited by lack of incentives, clear operating manuals and metrics for evaluation and visibility. Modifying the system will reward stakeholders, improve governance processes, and stimulate DAO participation.
POSSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION STEPS
Delegates Section: Create a separate comprehensive section on the governance website detailing Delegates/Voters profiles, areas of governance, contributions and other stats/metrics.
Incentives and Rewards: Introduce incentives for both Delegates/Voters and Delegators. Incentives could be vouchers for free NAMES registrations, wearables submissions or a percentage of DAO revenue or other.
Rating/Tier System: Implement a delegates/voters rating system based on contributions, activity, and community feedback, leveraging the DAO badges system.
Programs: Specify delegates/voters programs and governance areas, aligning delegates with DAO strategic direction.
COE Agreement: Require delegates to adhere to an existing code of ethics, with public declarations of agreement.
Stakeholder Representation: Clearly define the stakeholders each delegate represents, ensuring diverse community interests are addressed. (Content creators, LAND/NAME/ MANA holders etc)
KPIs and Stats: Develop comprehensive KPIs for delegates/voters to measure performance and impact within the DAO.
Evaluation and Feedback: Introduce a feedback mechanism for continuous assessment and community input on delegate performance.
Rotation and Term Limits: Implement term limits and rotation policies to encourage fresh perspectives and prevent power consolidation.
VP Pool: Establish a pool to distribute voting power to active and contributing delegates/voters, enhancing their governance impact.
Specializations: Categorize Delegates/Voters based on expertise areas.
Guidelines: Framework with scope of work fulfilled in a structured process with clear benchmarks, methodologies and rules.
Mission Requests: Enabling Delegates and Voters to propose specific missions-proposals aligned with the DAO’s strategic objectives. This section could facilitate community-driven initiatives that support governance, financial, marketing efforts, and other key DAO areas of interest. Proposals should be actionable, with clear objectives and timelines, and must demonstrate how they contribute to the overarching goals of the DAO. A structured review process will assess proposals for alignment with strategic priorities, feasibility, and potential impact on the Decentraland and DAO.
VOTING OPTIONS
YES: Revamp Delegation-Voting System.
NO: Leave as it is.
This is a non-binding pre-proposal poll to assess community sentiment. If approved, feedback and insights will be solicited to refine and finalize the points.
Why does anyone besides the person doing the delegating have and expectation of “accountability”?
Names = VP and would be pretty easy to exploit
Wearable Submission would require dao paying curators, and potentially be another free Vp exploit if the conversation around awarding creators with vp becomes governance
DAO Revenue share would be an SEC nightmare and also require revenue.
Seems like this would just create a ruling class and further alienate the majority of the community.
COE is a flawed document enforced by lowpaid centralized moderators. Seems very abuseabke.
This proposal is extremely vague even for a poll. I don’t really see anything super concrete here. I’m pretty against the idea of delegation as a whole personally so a lot of this just looks like it makes delegation stronger/easier to manipulate. There is no data being referenced here at all for these “ideas.”
I don’t understand why we would reward delegators and delegates extra incentives on top of the VP that they’re already being delegated…that doesn’t make any sense to me…That would reward so many bad actors that are already being rewarded with delegated VP. Giving them a % of the DAO revenue seems like it has an ulterior motive lying underneath it.
Rating systems have proven to be extremely flawed and not work. Especially the ones you’re proposing here. DAO badge system is still extremely new and there are very few badges that exist. Adding more badges just increases more work load/grants for the Governance Squad. So we need to be sure that we aren’t adding work that does not have substantial proof of working.
By participating in the DAO, everyone is affectively agreeing to the Code of Ethics. Just as anyone publishing content to the Decentraland Marketplace is agreeing to the Terms of Service/Use. Nobody makes a declaration of agreeance there. Making a public declaration of this doesn’t change anything.
“Stakeholders” representation is already transparent and visible via the transparency dashboard…so I’m not sure this bullet is valid.
Feedback on delegates doesn’t do anything because the DAO does not choose who gets delegated. The delegators choose that.
Opening up a pool of DAO owned delegates just creates more room and opportunity for the bad politics to play out. They can just whale in whoever they want as delegates like they did with the DAO Committee. These solutions should be solving that issue, not reinforcing it.
Specializations lacks any concrete plan. Anyone can say they specialize in anything. What does this fix?
Guidelines… I have no idea what this is trying to convey. We have COE, we have frameworks of how the voting system works already…what is this bullet proposing is changed??
Mission Requests = Bid/Tender imo.
Again, this proposal seems like it could have been an email rather than a poll that is being forced through to the next stage by the person who created it. There isn’t any data or research to back up any of this information. They all just sound like thoughts or ideas that came about randomly. Nothing here provides any real vision or clarity on what the actual goal is.
Question - isn’t there already high incentives for delegates? I thought they get to keep the 500,000 mana eventually if they “do the right thing” and make the right “deals”?
IMO, this proposal is a breath of fresh air for the delegation system. Maybe not all points should be considered for further stages, but this is a poll with a clear concept and direction. There will always be concerns and gameability, but we as a DAO can mitigate this by adopting a test approach, for example.
Currently, delegates/voters don’t receive any rewards for participation - no initiatives, no clear roadmap/pathways/guidelines. It’s almost always the same delegates; rotation is needed to bring new perspectives and its better to do it with a structured system/process!
For example, someone delegated me voting power. After the reevaluation period of 1 year, the delegator has the opportunity to review the delegate’s achievements and decide whether to renew the delegation or select a new delegate, thus preventing stagnation.
My opinion - DAO needs to fix and revamp Delegation system instead of removing it because it allows asset holders to vote without compromising asset safety and enables proxy voting for active members participation.
If Decentraland is a world owned and managed by its users… where are the people who actually own Decentraland in any of these conversations or votes, and what do any of the participants/users of this world actually own? I am still confused about what community means here. Very few of the people leading the conversation have anything to do with Decentraland as a platform other than getting paid for a position in a virtual platform that they never participate in, and the ones who participate and do the most get the least benefit. I agree @web3nit that something needs fixing, but I believe this is a fundamental problem that deals with the structure of this community… if the people who actually have a stake in this platform are not here doing the work… and the only other people doing the work are getting big salaries to do it… what are the rest of us doing here? I have asked for months… where are the people who actually hold the VP and the land in Decentraland… if they don’t care… or if their holdings are not incentive enough for them to be involved… I believe this community is missing a very fundamental piece that cannot be replaced by any delegates or any incentive.
I fully support rewards or maybe future airdrops in $MANA for DAO participants from the threasury. I believe its a fuel and very practical one, since slightly redistribution of voting power in $MANA could redistribute and enhance responsibility for the future of Decentraland and $MANA value
There’s many option for it, including what Coalition wrote
But every time we going to come to it, we going to hit by the wall. The name of this wall is - Proof of Personhood with Zero Knowledge proof or Attestation
Since me and anyone else can create many accounts and make them artificially alive to drain benefits and not carring about a damn
That’s why im going to vote for “Invalid qustion” this time! Something like that sounds good on paper and i want to support it , but its 2024 and we have autonomous AI agents and its gonna get more and more complex to recognize who is who
“rating system based on contributions, activity, and community feedback, leveraging the DAO badges system” - unfortunately is a general understanding, clicking, typing and virtual participants. All of it can be replicated, generated, copied by any account. Once we gonna have here benefits for that, this forum will be flooded with bots and autonomous AI agents
This wall is an end game , its gonna get only higher and higher until we jump to another clean and transparent HUMAN only governance with verification and benefits
One moment here is World ID 2.0 verification with a selfie auntification. It doesn’t require anyone to go to Orb for IRIS scan. It’s a mimimum that we should have. 1 account - selfie scan through app with zero knowlage proof and voting and proposals are open with benefits
There will be 3 layers:
World ID Device - selfie auntification WITHOUT Iris scan
World ID Orb - Iris scan by Orb
World ID Orb - Iris scan + selfie auntification
The code is open source and free to implement to any platform, only need to wait when this feature this year is going to be rolled out
