In another post @wilyam has gone into some detail to propose variable reward schemes. I’d like to bring the fundamental question back here to discuss:
What do we think about meritocratic approach to ambassador awards which would mean replacing the time-based vesting structure and moving over to some sort of unit based scoring mechanism? I’m not fundamentally opposed, but I am worried about spending a bunch of time and energy in complicated scoring processes and don’t think it materially moves the needle.
What would change my mind would be if people think that we are losing energy because the time-based vesting really just incentivizes doing the minimum to not get kicked out, whereas a points system would create a lot more energy and motivation. I think that might be true, and if so, we should really consider it.
I would propose that whatever scoring scheme we use, it is relative, meaning your cumulative score would determine your “weight” in the ambassador pool which would get funded based on the current commitments (I don’t think we would get support to change the tokenomics, but think we could get support to reallocate how we share the allocation.)
I also think it would be important to a) trial it in parallel for a few months, b) have a clearly defined way to transition with clear acceptance criteria, and c) have it be as simple as we can while still attracting the new creativity we hope it will bring.