New Proposal for Emissions model

Ive created a new emissions model that I think does a better job of representing how we should measure contributions

All details are in the spreadsheet, but please feel free to better share that information directly here if youd like

Notable changes in this model have @CryptoPawz @discolove007 @Jahris @Pavelsan @pontes @avidlearner.sol @TheRipTyde @CoffeeAttack @riderinred @rustandmoth receiving significantly more Grape


I don’t monitor emissions all that much (maybe I should now that I saw the old emission sheet), but I appreciate the bump up in $GRAPE in the new proposal.


Thank you! I’ll look at this tonight.

I agree w the approach of prioritising rewarding people that are more active in Governance

In fact (to also answer this comment in the doc) “The previous emission did not suggest any way to handle April/May – this proposes that we are done in handling old emissions and will use this model to better allocate moving forward” that was the exact way we were about to tackle April. We just did not want to mix the old and new approach into one proposal & unfortunately our time (as opposed to our tasks) is finite and we chose not to present April until we are done w Feb & March.

Overall, I like the direction and I would support it.


I am flattered that you included me in your proposal Dean, thank you.
Could you share details on the metrics you used in putting this proposal together? We could use them to swiftly move the discussion at large further. That would feel good to me - including single initiatives in a greater discussion is what makes things great. The magnificent building is made out of single bricks after all.


I used only publicly available data for this

-Discourse (i counted proposals made in last 30 days and comments made on them)
-Discord (I looked at recency of chat) and ranking on MEE6 - The Discord Bot (this leaderboard has been running since Feb 1st I believe – i can reset it whenever we want)
-Participation in coordinated meetings (DAO meetings/subDAO meetings) from screenshots ive been taking and posting in discord

Also tried to include some things that arent as visible but are available in discord – @Alexperts.sol is a great example of a solid contributor that doesnt have visibility. He donated 4 portal citizens, and more importantly, coordinated the creation of our foxy den with the fox team. There is no role that tracks that


As beneficiary of the proposed new emissions model based on contributions to the DAO I feel honoured. Thank you.


This totally makes sense and I think should be the way forward!

1 Like

I need more time to put together a new model. Maybe there could be some help on doing this?

My thoughts

1)we should introduce USDC into this discussion – its a good way to handle roles like moderators
2)Stream it over 4 years with MeanFi
3)Only create streams for members that qualified for membership emissions

To conclude; the new model would take some of those numbers and substitute USDC. Most roles can work in a bounty format, and DAO core/DAO board roles should be GRAPE only IMO. The roles like moderator and others that need to be constant functions could have a USDC value

Its a bigger discussion/needs more time


Would love to add an “selective compensation” component by certain members of either the board or defined leaders. There are times when there is GRAPEness done in the community that should be rewarded.

Primarily targeted towards community engagement. Just a thought, if this doens’t over complicate what is trying to be done.
I am thinking about a Discord bot bounty that would give “mods” the power to do this (or designated leaders)
There is also potential for user to be granted “raisens” that you can then redeem for GRAPE. You only get this by engaging in events/calls/discussion, etc…but im hoping on a tangent lol