Protocol update suggestion: additional incentives for challenge completion


#1

As of time of writing, there are over 300 inactive/stale challenges on the map as reported by FOAM Daily Digest, waiting for someone to spend gas to Update them. Over time this number grows slowly, but steadily. This gives wrong impression of the actual challenge activity level on the map.

Primary reason is probably insufficient incentives: prospective gains may not cover the gas cost of Update transaction. Secondary reason might be UX: challenger and voters forgetting which challenges they got involved in. Also, there are no protocol incentives for curators outside of the challenge to Update.

To provide an incentive, FOAM protocol could be updated in the following way: when a challenge is issued, some additional amount of challenger’s tokens is locked as Update Bounty. The Bounty is awarded as part of the final Update transaction. If Update is executed on the first day after the challenge ends, it is awarded to the challenger; this motivates challenger to Update and avoids gas racing with others. Otherwise it is awarded to the account executing the Update; this motivates curators to find out and Update expired challenges.

This still leaves an issue of existing 300 stale challenges, but would keep their growth in check.


Leaderboard Beta - New feature for Cartographers (Update)
#2

does the current leader board PoI count go by verified or by just created ?


#3

Hopefully the new email notification feature can alleviate some of this!

Thanks for the suggestion and proposal. See thread below for more on what upgrading the protocol means. It would entail a new registry with a new set of contracts that would need to be coded, audited and voted on to be deployed. As many security precautions need to be put in place when launching new contracts, an upgraded registry should be a substantial update. Great to start the discussion on what that could entail.

In the interim, the simplest solution will be a bot that is fed some ETH to call the update status function on behalf of users, as very low gas can be used if not in a rush.


#4

Leaderboard is by created, not verified.


#5

fix it to the way it should be and i bet you get a lot more updated PoIs


#6

I am not sure what you mean by “fix it to the way it should be”. The reason you need to approve tokens to the registry is a function of the ‘erc-20’ tokens are designed; if you do not approve you will never be able to retrieve them once sending to the registry. The same with for example 0x or Uniswap. Similarly Ethereum requires state changes to be called and gas paid. While this can be cleverly coded to hide from the user, ultimately gas needs to be paid. Ideas for mechanisms to encourage or incentivize gas payments can be implemented on top of the FOAM Map as is by anyone. More innovative architecture can be designed for a new registry but a bot can also be a short term way to address this friction point.

In any case thanks for feedback on leaderboard!! :slight_smile:


#7

im the idiot user that doesnt understand the tech behind it. from my point of view the leaders should have PoIs that have been confirmed good and are green on the map. that was all i was trying to say.


#8

appreciate the feedback and understood. Will look to integrate next!


#9

Hi @foamspacer, the 300 figure is total challenges, not stale challenges. I would estimate there are only ~10 stale challenges that are waiting to be updated. I expect the new emails to help and if someone or a bot is updating the rest manually, the map should be in good shape.

We can track the health through the diagram below. If updates are being carried out, “Voting underway” should stay close to the number of active challenges from Daily Digest and “Pending” close to the number of added points from Daily Digest.

So, a lot of points are being stuck in pending state. @yepyep’s suggestion might help


#10

Ah, thanks for correcting me, Caleb, I misinterpreted the numbers. It’s not as big issue as I imagined.


#11

I would stick to KISS Keep it simple stupid. complicating the workflow for POI is not necessary as the ecosystem evolves and the value for stakeholders increases organically.

Trying to goose this forward by tweaking something that is already deployed is unwise. we should skate to where the hockey puck is not where it was. the POU with the POI in early days were necessary to bootstrap the environment. We are now looking at the requirements for dPOL. focusing on static POI outside of that is looking backward. Let’s discuss how emergent synergies can be enabled by building on the simple base.

I would much rather see effort put into enabling features that make POI’s so valuable that no one would delay in Updating them because they are used in a future feature. Not because we’re picking up pennies around established mechanics of POI.

Our competition in the blockchain location space will be heating up. We can not stay still and we can not idle in navel gazing, our efforts must focus on synergies built amongst the existing FOAM stakeholders, and how that synergy will enable emergent behavior that are beneficial to all.

Deployable hardware is an advantage that we will be able to provide to the crypto community enabling the L2 of blockchain applications. This hardware is required for dPOL and this is where the real value of FOAM will emerge. We should brace for the day when legacy POI and Signals are worth more then our current concept allows. Looking for the small change of rearchitecting the POI workflow is NOT where we will find it. We will only find it by empowering the stakeholders and enabling emergent synergies.

We are in a Crypto Winter, the ice will thaw and the VC interest will return, we must lay this ground work now. That is where we are headed. Focus on dPOL it will return exponential value.


#12

TL;DR: DPoL is more important than relatively minor usability issues.