Hi @Doo_StableLab and other contributors, thank you for proposing this Delegate Compensation Program! We see a lot of potential in this proposal to drive greater participation and foster diversity in Compound governance.
We have been actively engaged in governance over the past four months, voting and providing feedback on proposals, and we’re excited to continue contributing through this program.
We appreciate the clear evaluation criteria for incentivized delegates outlined in this proposal, as tracked through the Delegate Analytics Dashboard. However, we have a few suggestions for further discussion:
Clarifying the role of community participation
The proposal mentions that community participation will be factored into delegate evaluations, but it’s not entirely clear how this will be measured.
Based on the Delegate Analytics Dashboard, it seems to primarily focus on on-chain voting participation for scoring the delegates.
Inspired by Arbitrum’s Delegate Incentive Program, which incorporates voting rationale into scoring and community feedback, a similar approach here could enhance transparency and better reflect meaningful contributions. If you already consider this point, it would be great to clarify this in the evaluation logic.
Ensuring support for delegates with smaller COMP delegations
The current scoring system gives certain weight to voting power, which could demotivate smaller delegates despite their active participation. This may reduce diversity in the governance ecosystem.
An idea: introduce small incentives for active but under-represented delegates. This could help keep them engaged and encourage deeper participation, strengthening the governance community as a whole.
We hope these ideas support the program’s goals of fostering a more inclusive and effective governance ecosystem. Thank you for considering our feedback in advance!