During the last month, we gladly experienced a great level of interactions from our community, and some key members stood out with their contributions.
We’d like to propose an initial framework to reward value creation in Idle.
There are 3 recent examples of value-adding activities for the protocol:
1/ Emblem of community-based initiatives, Emiliano Bonassi contributed many times to expand Idle ecosystem and fixed bugs for Idle’s integrators. A quick recap of his works:
- Yearn V2 USDC Idle strategy
- Curve and Harvest accounting bug report
- IdleTokenHelper, a tool to simplify Idle protocol integration for third-party services
We would always support these contributions, and that’s why the core team assigned 1k idleUSDC bounty for it.
2/ A great example of how the community can drive protocol improvements and new modules is @8bitporkchop.
By starting a brainstorming post, he lit the few for a smart treasury implementation. After many topics and a lot of replies, the Smart Treasury came alive and Governance decided to proceed. All required Temperature Checks reached a consensus on the parameters, and the Grant has been assigned.
3/ On the security side, MRKWHG (Discord user) provided evidence and helped the team to face a misallocation bug in the governance tokens distribution.
In this case, the core team rewarded him with a well-deserved 1.5 ETH bounty.
These kinds of contributions should be incentivized as much as possible. Their attitude is the perfect example of what decentralized community cooperation can achieve.
The above cases cannot be compared to each other, but they all share that governance could have assigned a reward for their efforts. Setting up an efficient cooperation model takes many iterations and you really need to adapt it to the stage of your project.
In order to speed up the release of such rewards and foster community activities, I’m wondering if a lite treasury committee could facilitate bounties distribution to community contributors.
The goal here would be to get to a system where community contributors manage the day-by-day maintenance of the protocol, and a set of counsels manage a budget on a mandate. This approach would help bug seekers, builders, and thinkers to work on the protocol on a voluntary basis, but to be compensated if the outcomes bring benefits to the protocol.
Different departments/areas (eg development, communications, compliance, strategies, …) might coordinate through a multisig-based system, reporting activities and achievements to the whole Governance, that acts as a supervisor.
We’ll release more details about the committee system in the next few weeks, but we’d like to hear your opinion about it. Is this something you would endorse?