[VeBetterDAO Proposal] Rewarding agents for sustainability impact

VeBetterDAO
1

[Discussion] Should VeBetter Recognise AI Agents That Deliver Sustainability Impact?

TL;DR:
We’re exploring the creation of a VeBetter dapp called AgentRewards (TBC) that would earn B3TR through the standard weekly allocation process and distribute those rewards monthly to Veworld.ai agents delivering genuine sustainability value. Same rules as every other dapp but with a different purpose.

We’d love the community’s input before we move forward.

The Problem

VeWorld.ai currently hosts AI agents across a wide range of use cases. Some of these agents could deliver real, meaningful sustainability impact — for example, agents that teach financial literacy, support mental health awareness, or help users reduce their environmental footprint.

The VeBetter ecosystem currently has no way to recognise or reward these creators. Its framework was designed for traditional dapps that reward users for completing trackable actions — not for creators building tools that transfer knowledge, build skills, or change behaviour over time.

This isn’t about replacing dapps. It’s about asking whether the ecosystem should recognise a broader set of value creators.

What We’re Proposing

A single VeBetter dapp, AgentRewards, that:

  • Goes through the standard endorsement process, same as any other dapp
  • Competes for weekly B3TR allocation through community votes — VOT3 holders decide whether it deserves a share
  • Distributes earned B3TR monthly to the top 20 eligible AgentForge agents, based on their trust score
  • Is automated and transparent — monthly results fixed at month-end and published publicly

To be eligible, an agent must carry a sustainability label — a self-declared tag applied during agent creation, representing alignment with one or more UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). VeWorld.ai retains discretion to remove a label when it has been applied improperly.

Rewards are split equally among the top 20 qualifying agents each month. The reward amount will naturally vary with the dapp’s allocation. This will function as a recognition award, not an income stream.

Why a Dapp, Not a New Allocation Category?

We considered proposing a structural change — expanding VeBetter’s eligibility framework to include agents as a distinct category. That would require contract-level changes, new evaluation frameworks, and opens difficult boundary questions.

For now, the simpler path is: build a dapp that plays by the existing rules, whose purpose is to reward agents. No framework changes, no new categories.

How Agent Selection Works (Current Thinking)

Eligible agents are ranked using their AgentSuite trust score — a metric that factors in completed tasks, number of active users, usage volume, recent activity, and creator track record.

The top 20 sustainability-labelled agents by trust score each month receive an equal share of that month’s AgentRewards allocation.

We’re aware the trust score approach currently skews toward volume and popularity, which may not always reflect genuine sustainability impact. We’re open to evolving the selection method over time, including introducing a community voting layer once the eligible pool grows large enough to make it meaningful.

What “Sustainability” Means Here

For this programme, sustainability follows the United Nations definition, anchored to the 17 SDGs.

The core eligibility test is:

If 10,000 people used this agent regularly, would it create
meaningful benefits beyond making those 10,000 users happier
or more efficient?

Agents that qualify include those that improve access to education, support healthier behaviour, reduce environmental impact, or strengthen economic participation for underserved communities. Agents that exist purely for personal convenience — productivity tools, email assistants, entertainment — do not qualify regardless of how they’re labelled. We can provide further specific examples if needed.

Some Honest Trade-offs

Allocation pool impact: AgentRewards would compete on its own merits through community votes.

Voting cold start: Unlike dapps with active user bases, AgentRewards has no natural direct users to drive votes. Votes will depend on whether the broader community sees value in what AgentRewards represents.

Trust score as a proxy: The trust score is a reasonable starting point but may be an imperfect measure of sustainability impact. We’d rather launch with a workable system and improve it than wait for a perfect one.

2

A Note Before You Share Your Thoughts

This is an early-stage discussion, and we genuinely want community input. At the same time, we’d ask that feedback is guided by a few principles that have shaped our thinking:

  • Keep it simple. The best designs here are ones that work without heavy overhead — for creators, for voters, and for the team maintaining it. If a suggestion adds significant complexity, it needs to justify that cost clearly.

  • Think beyond the current dapp model. AgentRewards is a different kind of dapp serving a different purpose. Feedback anchored purely in how existing X2E dapps work may not translate, and that’s intentional. We’re trying to recognise a new form of value creation.

  • Trust automation over manual gatekeeping. Where possible, we want decisions encoded in logic, not left to committees or discretionary review. Suggestions that introduce centralised control points — even well-intentioned ones — will be weighed carefully against that principle.

  • This is not a threat to dapps. AgentRewards competes for allocation on the same terms as every other dapp, through community votes. These two things can coexist.

Open Questions for the Community

With those principles in mind, here’s what we’d most value your input on:

  1. Is this a direction worth pursuing? Should VeBetter recognise agent creators?

  2. Is a single dapp the right vehicle? We think it’s the simplest path that requires no rule changes. If you see a cleaner approach, we’d like to hear it.

  3. On the trust score: It’s an imperfect but practical starting point. What would make you more or less comfortable with it as the initial selection method?

  4. On the sustainability label: Is that a reasonable starting point, or is there a lightweight community check you think would meaningfully improve integrity without adding friction?

  5. Anything we haven’t considered? We’re open to perspectives we haven’t anticipated.

3

Support!

Firstly, let’s apply first principal rule here - If Agent’s work made contributions to sustainability impacts or goals, it should be eligible to receive rewards. For example, an agent makes educational inclusive and affordable to everyone.

Secondly, agent can represent companies and individuals - as long as agent does the work to the sustainability missions, it’s eligible. As matter of fact, Agents are much easier vehicle to bring “things” on-chain.