Governance Staking rewards based on governance activity

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