Proposal: Unlocking Endorsement Capital to Foster Growth and Protecting the VebetterDao Ecosystem
1. The Current Problem: Locked Capital & Single Node dApp Endorsements.
The current VeBetterDAO endorsement model, while functional, imposes significant limitations that lock up valuable endorsement capital and reduce security for node holders.
Locked Endorsement Points: The “all-or-nothing” system requires endorsers to commit their entire point value to a single dApp. For a Mjolnir X node holder, this means 100 points are locked in one dApp, even if that dApp only needed a few points to reach its goal. This creates a massive pool of dormant endorsement capital that could be used to endorse new dApps. Or if a new dApp comes onto the DAO, an endorser may want to switch but has to bring all their points. Leaving a dApp they wish they could still endorse partially at risk.
Centralized Endorsements: The system allows a dApp to be fully endorsed by a single large node. This is not true decentralization and fails to represent broad community consensus, concentrating power instead of distributing it.
2. The Proposed Solution: Activating Capital and Flexible Governance
This proposal introduces a flexible and secure model designed to unlock dormant endorsement points and empower node holders. By moving to a partial-endorsement system, we can activate idle capital and give node holders granular control over their assets.
Unlocking Capital with Multiple dApp Endorsements: The single-dApp limit will be removed. Node holders will be able to split their points and distribute them across as many dApps as they wish. This immediately frees up thousands of locked points, allowing them to flow to new and emerging projects and stimulating ecosystem-wide growth.
Enhancing Security with Granular Control: The un-endorsement process will become partial. If a node holder wishes to withdraw support, they can choose exactly how many points to remove. Only those specific points will enter the cooldown period, leaving the rest of the node’s points active and available for use. This significantly enhances security and flexibility for the node holder.
Promoting Decentralization with an Endorsement Cap: A single node holder can endorse any given dApp with a maximum of 35 points. This ensures no single entity can unilaterally approve a project, forcing dApps to acquire genuine, broad-based community support.
Additionally, a cap of 115 total endorsement points per dApp will be implemented. This will allow padding and give some security for each dApps endorsement on the DAO, as well as freeing up more endorsement points to be used elsewhere. The 100 points requirement to get endorsed will remain.
3. Transition for Existing Endorsements
To ensure all participants benefit immediately, a one-time migration will occur.
Automatic Adjustment: Any existing endorsement from a single node holder to a dApp that exceeds the 35-point limit will be automatically reduced to 35 points.
Immediate Return of Points: All excess points will be instantly credited back to the node holder’s available point balance. These unlocked points will be immediately available for endorsing other dApps, with no cooldown.
This one-time event will instantly activate the new, more flexible and secure system for everyone.
4. Summary of Changes
Added Features
A new interface for assigning a specific number of endorsement points.
A new interface for removing a specific number of endorsement points.
A one-time, automatic migration script to adjust all existing endorsements.
Modified Features
Capital Unlocked: Node holders can split points across multiple dApps.
Security Enhanced: Only withdrawn points enter cooldown, not the entire node’s balance.
Decentralization Fostered: A 35-point maximum per node per dApp is introduced.
Buffer Added: The maximum endorsement cap for a dApp is now 115 points.
Removed Features
The “one dApp per node” limitation is removed.
The “all-or-nothing” endorsement and un-endorsement model is deprecated.
Unchanged Features
The requirement for a dApp to be successfully endorsed remains at 100 points.
I’m not convinced decentralized endorsement is needed on a dapp level. If you have the rarest x node it should be super powerful and there can never be more x nodes ever again so their supply is extremely limited since Stargate.
No ones saying they cant be/remain powerful. But a single person should not be able to dictate whether a dapp can stay endorsed, no matter how much its worth. It does not align with what the DAO is trying to be.
I understand what you are saying, but what does that have to do with needing more than one endorser to be accepted on the dao? This promotes healthy engagement with more than just one entity and also acts as a security measure and vetting tool.
It is not that simple to acquire a molnijr x node now since Stargate. You need capital and someone who is willing to sell this nft. I understand that a dapp should not be untouchable but it is not easy to acquire 100 points right now since Stargate launch. Also why penalize the x node rather than put a policy in place that stops that a dapp can vote for themself.
Correct me if I am wrong but that is what is happening with for example with TrashDash, Bitegram, Bye bye Bites (and others) .. Dapps that should not have endorsement but someone with loads of money are keeping them there. Is this a fair system? In my opinion is not.
How would this penalize an xnode? If anything, the first part of this proposal frees up unused points so you can endorse other dApps. That’s a benefit in my eyes.
dApps that are performing poorly need to be held accountable. There are some on the dao currently that are being called out and only have one endorser (not the dapp)
So the question is, can we trust one endorser to push a dApp when they’ve been neglecting the community? I don’t believe so.
In regards to making a rule to not allow dApps to endorse themselves. It would be hard to prove such a thing.
Yup, you’re picking up what I’m putting down! This system needs to change. The power needs to be with the community, and currently it’s not.
@Elgreco.vet as the sole endorser for Green Commuter, who are currently facing community backlash for their negligence, I’m sure you can understand why it’s important that more than one person should decide on whether a dApp should be endorsed.
I would like to add the possibility to add negative endorsement points so community can push out dapps that should not belong in the DAO and do self endorsement or buy endorsements.
100-115 points => Endorsed and active
0-99 points => Inactive (if new) or in grace period
Negative points => Removed immediately from the DAO next round (skips grace period)
Negative points could be something that could be used to remove inactive dapps, but if added a lower threshold would need to be added in my opinion. 10 or 15 points or something. Otherwise itll be a war around 100 endorsement points to remove other dapps.
It does add another complexity layer to the proposal too.
Would they need to be removed from the page? Or shown with a new tag?
Do you “regain” negative points if an app is removed entirely? How do we prevent abuse by one node if so?
how do we display track negative points if an app is removed?
I think it pushes this proposal out of scope in a way and an add like that would need its own proposal in my opinion. It has a lot of questions that need solving
I understand and I told Green Commuter to communicate more and improve the fraud detection. I will pull my endorsement if they cannot move the needle in the right direction in the next week. I’m not okay with draining the DAO either. I did see you put the proposal for support. I’m willing to help the community in any case even if the proposal will not pass. But I want them to have 1-2 weeks especially now during holiday periods to react. @BreakingBallz I agree you cannot trust every node holder to do the right thing for the community. I will however lead by example if nothing changes.
Could very well that an own proposal is needed. However - I think the Foundation would appreciate to know that it might be coming so they can take it into account with their iteration once this passes.
I have been thinking a lot about preventing abuse for negative points and one solution I had in mind is that the time-out for negative endorsement is longer than endorsement.
Currently - when you endorse a dapp - you can’t remove it and assign them to another one until the next round. For negative endorsement I would extend this period to be 4 rounds.
Negative endorsement points just means the dapp needs to focus on getting more community trust and thus more endorsements to get back to the 100 points to be active again.
I can work it out more if you want as I’m writing this in a hurry - but it all doesn’t have to be very complex.
I would expect nothing less from you. You’ve been a great supporter for other needed changes on the DAO. Happy to talk this out with you and figure out other things to keep this fair and balanced for all invovled.
I’m a layman, so. yes please. I do think this is something the community has asked for in the past and it’s worth fleshing it out so it would be more digestable. If you could just give an example. From the start of an endorsement to how/when the negative points would happen and how it plays out.
Yeah id love to see a more detailed solution. I do still think it warrants its own discourse thread and discussions though, but i can be convinced otherwise
We just discussed (I co-wrote this proposal) a bunch of changes/solutions, the negative points being one of them, and trimmed away as much out of scope as we could. Both to save as potential discussions for discourse but also to keep it as focused on its goal as possible.
The worry of it being used offensively by dapps to remove other dapps without a proposal is the biggest worry.
Theres a thin line between dapps underperforming and/or not working (where negative points are fair) to dapps just being a competitor and other, similar dapps with capital just using their leverage to get rid of the competition. And it would be hard to track I feel.
Would love to see this happen, our app Power Up has struggled to get re-endorsed after taking our app offline for maintenance. That’s definitely on us for not being production ready but now that we’re live would love to be able to re-establish ourselves with the community and think this would make it a lot easier to get support!
