Governance Staking rewards based on governance activity

Well, the goal is to create an incentive for taking part in voting. The reward for that should be a bit more than just “nice to have”. Also everyone can participate in the votings, so theres no reason to be mad at others for getting more, as they can just vote & get higher rewards themselves.

Sure, but the incentive for staking is mostly to lock tokens away from market too. I think that shouldn’t be compromised.

I guess we should vote on this too … the few that do vote will be deciding their own rewards lol

While I agree that active members should be rewarded more there is a chance that this proposal might reduce the quality of participation.
The course of graviton will largely be defined by its DAO members. If somehow a culture is created where minimal participation (i.e. voting) results in the highest return. The majority of votes might be random because why spent time researching as it’s not required.
I understand this the be the worst possible scenario and would guess this more likely the higher the reward difference between active and passive voters.
I like the idea and definitely agree active quality contributions should be rewarded.
I simply want to point out caution should be taken and we shouldn’t get greedy on the extra reward. 10-15% seems way too little as EBs still did a lot for the project by giving it funds.

1 Like

Another idea is as follows.
I agree the participation of votes should be strongly rewarded because well researched choices and participation will result in a better project for which everybody will reap the rewards.

I am for the implementation of a quiz at every vote that evaluates the knowledge of the voter on the matter at hand. While this might be a barrier for some, it does reward the voters that are knowledgeable about the subject rather than reward people for voting.

Specifically, I’d say a minimum score is required to be allowed to vote, similarly to EB participation. This system is probably easiest to implement but still creates a minimal threshold that will likely keep people from randomly voting some option.


You put into words my concerns better than me. I agree with the idea of a quiz like EB for each important decision.

Quality of the votes also matters. Rewards for voting Yes but each one who votes must at least understand the nature of proposal and how will that impact the system.

1 Like

I see this as quite critical. I have been part of the Steem and Hive community, where you get rewards based on your upvotes for social media posts. The idea is great and I agree that we should try to get people engaged as much as possible. But if you need to vote in order to get rewards, you might end up losing investors and others to make dumb uneducated choices just to get more rewards.

These are two entirely different things, participating in voting and randomly liking social media posts.
Also its not a punishment for non-voters but a reward for those who vote, so I dont see investors leaving because of that.
With a quiz implemented you could prevent people from randomly voting any options.

Also its not a punishment for non-voters but a reward for those who vote, so I dont see investors leaving because of that.

Depending on the implementation rewarding the active community this might wel result in lower rewards for inactive members. For example, if allocations are fixed and the share is reweighted the increased reward for active members is at the cost of the inactive members.

I don’t think this has any effect on investors though. Investments will largely be based on how the projection of the token value is, rather than how much extra reward can be gained from staking.

The project has a huge influence from the active community members and I think these should be rewarded as such. I think the Graviton team has repeatedly shown this to be of high value through the multitude of rewards.

Its not random liking of social media posts, there was a complex mechanism behind it that determined the amount of rewards. But anyway. An incentive might sound a little less harsh, but in the end it means the same - you do not get the full rewards if you do not participate - and that can deter investors.

With regard to the quiz, how do you want to implement this in a decentralised way?

When I invest I look at the future market cap and then make an estimate which amount of tokens I will own after staking, yield farming etc. The larger investors will likely follow the same aproach.

The concerns are reasonable but i think we have have to be very carefull by taking a cut of staking rewards, the main objective behind this idea is to involve a stronger community and have a more decentralized governance. I would suppose to get the message out there from now on, by means of social media, telegram pinned message, here in the forum, … to make a point of having the people informed within a propper time span given.

Then from there on, lets say after the topic (on forum) has been a month old, there will be a proposal to vote for the activity in governance vs. staking reward compensation by means of governance voting, starting in the future. Implementing backwards would harm the community which we dont want, all by all we are all early backers and will need to take our responsebillity showing a strong community and governance involvement.

10k$ of “smart”/“active” money is much more valuable than 100k $ passive/sleeping money/investors. I mean having 10 active investors-ambassadors will bring to the system much more than 100k in the year/two.


I have the same concerns that the quality of the voters decreases if you get punished too hard for not voting.
I like the idea with a quiz, maybe ask people about the outcome of the last 3-5 votes? (Easy enough to look up, but still require some effort for the voter. And probably quite easy for active voters to remember, or go check).
I wouldn’t punish people too hard for not voting, and would more word it like a bonus for regular voters. Maybe pay 1x for non-voters and pay 1.2x for regular voters. (Participating in 3/5 last votes qualifies as regular voter)

I like an idea with small quiz (4-5 questions to verify)

I don’t mind the voting incentive, but would like to add at the current moment I’ve tried voting in all three proposals and gotten a transaction error each time. Working with Anton now to try and figure it out. Would be patient until all of the kinks are worked out to implement any sort of voting tier as it is not due to effort on my end.


There is always the option to reward active voters through other means like airdrop mechanisms, much like the achievement system. Like this, there is no difference in reward as it does not scale with the amount of money somebody has invested.


Models that are heavily inspired on being or becoming DAOs typically work with airdrops in the from of activity (voting/testing/funding/likes). A recent example: Introducing GTC - Gitcoin’s Governance Token - Gitcoin's Blog

Of course, many projects that turn DAO never explain these things before they have determined their formula’s towards allocating rewards to their contributors, which are always retro-active. Otherwise, if it was known that in three years rewards would be allocated based on forum posts I fear we’d soon be overwhelmed by bots and spam.

Gitcoin also has a really cool way of allowing people to have an impact with their governance tokens without requiring their constant attention. They do this through the use of stewards, people basically link their voting power to these stewards, who then follow up on everything happening and make choices according to their beliefs. It’s basically similar to voting for politicians to represent you in a government. Depending on how big Graviton becomes, systems like this make a lot of sense because the majority of the people are not interested in staying on top of everything. I’ll suggest this in a different thread.

Obviously, Graviton is not mature enough to be fully DAO, and is currently mostly led by a professional team. Nonetheless, based on the vision of the team there are several interesting projects to take inspiration from.


Video tutorial about voting is great, simple yet informative.
To vote you have to participate with at least 1 GTON, but how come it is allowed to enter 0.00000123 and confirm transaction? This is invalid vote allowed. Shouldn’t we use integer values for votes?
At least I suggest preventing transactions for vote below 1 gton.
Agree that some vote participation reward mechanism has to be implemented.

1 Like

I like an idea of Delegates actually

it can work as Leased PoS actually

people are delegating their governance power to somebody and share some % of their profit with Delegate

all delegates must be active and educated enought to vote/dicuss/suggest proposals while community will choose who they are trust more

but this can work after more broader audience adopted Graviton

like big influencers/CEX managers/Strategic Partners and Investors or big GTON holders