Requires DApps to allocate at least 25% of B3TR rewards to a Reward Commitment Pool. Higher allocations earn economic and reputation bonuses, rewarding meaningful contributions to the community.
If i understand the point of this proposal is to ensure that a x2earn app IS actually using some of its b3tr allocation to invest in itself? For example to have the following breakdown:
10% to endorsers
20% to founders
25% to user growth initiatives?
45% to users
it just seems to me that requiring small apps to make this commitment is a heavy burden on them, when they want to use that 25% as real-rewards.
This is to protect the rewards for users, who are the main protagonists of the rewards that Dapps obtain, but also the dapps themselves because they have a large margin to manage expenses and so on.
Yes, at least 25%, then it all depends on each Dapp, obviously the higher the percentage, the higher the reward it will get, it’s a great incentive for Dapps and at the same time ensures certain rewards for users.
Hi Gianni,
as promised, I wanted to share my thoughts here to better understand your proposal, because it seems that even within the Italian community it hasn’t been fully understood yet. In my opinion, if a proposal isn’t clear from the start, it’s already at risk of being overlooked.
So, let me ask you a few direct questions. Please try to answer with a simple “Yes” or “No” so that everyone can better grasp your idea. This might also help bring more people into the discussion with additional ideas or suggestions to refine it:
If I understood correctly, your proposal aims to reward DApps that distribute a higher share of rewards to the community, allowing them to gain higher allocations in the future. Is that correct?
The additional rewards given to these virtuous DApps (those committing more than 25%) would be funded by the VeBetterDAO treasury, right?
I don’t own a DApp myself, so I’m not sure whether the reward distribution metrics can be manipulated (perhaps some DApp owners can clarify this). But in case it’s technically possible to falsify these numbers, have you considered any protection or verification mechanism to prevent abuse?
Finally, many new DApps start with relatively small allocations (often below 1000 B3TR). In your opinion, is your proposal sustainable for them, or could it end up penalizing smaller newcomers?
1- Yes, the goal of the Dynamic Reward Commitment System (DRCS) is to create a meritocratic and circular mechanism:
DApps that reinvest a higher portion of their rewards (minimum 25%) into valuable users and initiatives receive a boost in future allocations.
This way, sustainable behavior is rewarded, not just the number of votes received.
2 - Regarding rewards, I initially considered the treasury room, but I decided that the system shouldn’t require new funds or generate inflation, so:
The bonus (e.g., +10%, +20%, +30%) is an internal reallocation of the reward pool already planned for each cycle.
In practice, it’s an “intelligent” redistribution:
Virtuous DApps receive a little more, less active ones a little less—
but the overall total of B3TR distributed in the cycle doesn’t change.
3 - The proposal requires distribution metrics to be on-chain and publicly verifiable, ensuring that the declared commitment is transparent and traceable.
Furthermore, the DAO (or a dedicated smart contract module) will be able to verify that transactions actually intended for users or community projects are genuine and correspond to the declared quota.
Any DApps that falsify data will automatically lose their right to the bonus in the next cycle.
4 - No penalty for small DApps—in fact, greater opportunity.
The DRCS is designed to reward behavior, not size.
Even a small DApp that reinvests, for example, 40% of its 800 B3TR can earn a bonus and climb the rankings organically.
This incentivizes the growth of new businesses and makes competition fairer, because merit becomes the primary lever.
In short:
DRCS = Zero new issuance, zero penalties, zero manipulation.
Only transparency, meritocracy, and shared value for users and DApps.
If I understood correctly, your proposal aims to reward DApps that distribute a higher share of rewards to the community, allowing them to gain higher allocations in the future. Is that correct?
The additional rewards given to these virtuous DApps (those committing more than 25%) would be funded by the VeBetterDAO treasury, right?
I don’t own a DApp myself, so I’m not sure whether the reward distribution metrics can be manipulated (perhaps some DApp owners can clarify this). But in case it’s technically possible to falsify these numbers, have you considered any protection or verification mechanism to prevent abuse?
Finally, many new DApps start with relatively small allocations (often below 1000 B3TR). In your opinion, is your proposal sustainable for them, or could it end up penalizing smaller newcomers?