To foster a vibrant and engaged DAO community, I propose a reward system that recognizes both authors of approved proposals and other members who make significant contributions to the project.
This incentive will not only motivate members to participate but also enhance the DAO’s reputation as a supportive and rewarding platform.
While this proposal offers several benefits, it’s important to consider potential downsides and implement the system carefully.
To ensure fairness, sustainability, and transparency, we should:
Establish clear guidelines for rewards and the process for awarding them.
Consider recognizing a variety of contributions, not just proposal authorship.
Regularly review and adjust the reward system to ensure its effectiveness.
By carefully addressing these factors, we can create a reward system that benefits the DAO and its members while maintaining a fair and equitable environment.
I believe establishing a clear DAO operating model, including roles and responsibilities, is essential for building robust governance and strengthening the partnership with BankSocial/Fivnancial. It will also be key to developing mutually beneficial revenue models. I’m fully supportive of this initiative—do you have any initial thoughts on the roles and responsibilities? I suggest we start brainstorming and set a date for an initial proposal discussion.
Would be great to start brainstorming at todays video call, as I wont be able to join counting on you and the team to open up the subject and will catch up after the call
Anon, We discussed this today and agreed that we can and should have living breathing document call it a charter or something else, maybe it will be a web page for all we care.
For now let us set a date one week from now to brainstorm? I took action to create a basic operating model with roles and responsibilities and we can come together with @SeekerOfCoin to review it and add additional dimensions (rewards …etc) to it before we put something out for the verifiied community to weigh in on… in the following weeks
I would only support such a reward system if the rewards were issued from donations and not taken from the SLP. Rewarding people for participating in an organization they voluntarily joined is a little nonsensical to me. This seems like a great way to get disingenuous people to participate for a payout. If loan processing gets to the point that it becomes an entire job then compensation for delegates would be appropriate. I do fully support a voluntary community sourced reward pool for rewarding members that go above and beyond. The age of participation trophies needs to end though.
@anon@Dejacoa discussing reward contributions without fully understanding the necessary growth strategies for the SLP or which responsibilities we might need to expand makes it hard to define a clear path forward. I’m approaching this with an open mind but am mindful that we shouldn’t put the cart before the horse. Incentive mechanisms can be incredibly powerful tools for encouraging meaningful contributions. However, dismissing the concept due to concerns over attracting disingenuous participants seems premature—it’s like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Let’s take this step by step. Our first priority should be aligning on the core structure, including the Charter and the responsibilities. Once we have that foundation, we can potentially design an incentive system that rewards high-impact contributions and ensures sustainable growth for the DAO and SLP. In the right structure, to enhance participation without sacrificing integrity.
I think an incentive system would be great, as long as we can make it make sense from an engagement and fiscal responsible perspective. We cant be giving rewards directly from the SLP and depleting it. Happy to review and discuss it further.
I have some thoughts / ideas but will need more due diligence from the community before we can harden it. will work on getting something out late this week after the charter
As stated in the initial proposal, if not done properly it can clearly lead to some downsides but at the same time not setting it up might also slow us down.
I truly believe if we give ourselves enough independance we will be able to implement things much faster which will give uss more credibility towards investors.
Right now we rely entirely on Banksocial for all our development tasks and as a result, the removal of the transfer tax which has been voted upon a while back is still not implement.
We have to evolve to stay on top of competition and in order to evolve we cant just rely on Banksocial or generous contributions, we have to get skilled people to invest time and energy and that comes with a cost.
Some development features can take a few month to implement and I think it’s unrealistic to think that people will spend so much time for free.
agreed… we will get there eventually with a well designed incentive system, but you do bring up another important point given the BankSocial’s existing platform priorities and roadmap… how will what the DAO is proposing be prioritized? … something to think about
I suggest we get a call with you, @SeekerOfCoin and me going this week to cover some initial thinking… I can send out a zoom invite if needed
Redefining the north star vision of Banksocial as well as the DAO
Make an overview of all the products being built
define their importance
define their development stage
make an assessment of the situation to see who is in charge of what and where help is required.
This will help define which roles need to be filled and which tasks can be outsourced. If some tasks require specific funding then we can find a way to find that funding rather through Banksocial for or through the DAO.
For example if we need a website for the DAO where loans can be requested and where loaners can have a dashboard to follow their payments well we set up a plan and find the proper team to do it.
as a follow up, below is the proposal for the charter for an initial discussion … it incorporates some initial feedback from a few community members who helped me shape it
My plan is to introduce this to the community next week and maybe have a call next Friday to disucss it
Transfer tax is something that took months of building. even the HBAR devs couldnt figure it out. We cant conflate decisions to build, with ease of building.
BankSocial has 7 developers and an ability to increase those numbers significantly. But spending an infinite amount of money to release something immutability on chain QUICKLY, is not the right way to build enterprise software, especially when the software being built has never been built before.
Without a clear incentive system, the DAO risks becoming overly dependent on sporadic volunteer work, which isn’t sustainable long-term. Incentives aren’t about pushing people to do more work; they’re about building a stronger connection to our mission and ensuring that contributions have a real impact.
The DAO should be defining its own tasks and goals to stay in control of its future. While setting up incentives has its challenges, not doing anything could lead to missed opportunities or delay in value realization. Let’s design rewards that prioritize quality, accountability, and shared progress
It sounds like you’re rightly considering the technical complexity involved in building mechanisms of the reward system, and focusing on BankSocial’s current roadmap makes sense.
However, this could be an opportunity to take a “crawl, walk, run” approach for longer term sustainability of the DAO. We can start by defining a clear process and capturing community input (crawl). In the walk phase, we could operate manually or semi-automate reward claims and qualification tracking, with documented outcomes stored on-chain to maintain transparency. Ultimately, the run phase could aim for full, on-chain integration, building on these initial steps when priorities align?
I support the idea of a task list, or “backlog”. But also believe we should remain flexible in our approach to executing it.
If a particular task is crucial for our growth, we should have the ability to utilize any necessary means to complete it. This may involve compensating/rewarding individuals or entities to expedite the process.
