Correct, the rankings will be based on the trailing 6 months.
Various types of participation are important to consider—the rudimentary aspect of governance though boils down to proposals and voting. Standardization in programs is important, so weighting general voting participation rate to 60% we think is quite fair. Things get muddled quickly when there are too many variables—grant programs themselves require their own initiatives. Of course the other 40% of the delegate score weight also relates to voting but applies a higher degree of sophistication to quantifying voting impact. This should help make this program more robust than some other DAO compensation initiatives.
As far as adjacent activities like grants go, there are other media through which groups can make an impact. For the stated grant example, I’d encourage the team to check out CGP, which has been running for some time: