Hodlx Guest Post Send your message
Many decentralized independent organizations (DAOS) are struggling with a decrease in the percentage of participation and participation on voters, despite the management of treasury bonds with millions of dollars.
A promising solution appeared DAO incentives, where members receive financial or symbolic rewards to actively participate in the ruling.
One of the monthly salaries of UISWAP for delegates to allocate Gnosissisdao to the unmunused vote power, DAOS aims to combat voter indifference and give professional character to their government structures.
But do these incentives make Daws more democratic or just turn governance into an annoyed economy?
Source: Deepdao
The problem of indifference Low participation and high risk rate
The participation of voters in many DAO remains concerned, often in individual numbers.
Even important protocols such as Maker and UISWAP are struggling to attract more than 10 % voters’ participation of critical proposals.
This indifference undermines decentralization, as decisions are dominated by some active whales instead of a real decentralized society.
Enter the concept of “Mining of Governance” Explicit users’ reward for their participation in governance activities.
DaOS hopes to convert the professionals of the distinctive passive symbol into active stakeholders by pushing the participants.
Let’s explore modern status studies and their impact.
Devices of the Uniwap delegate 6000 dollars per month for active vote
The main example of this is the UnISWAP DEPEGATE Reward Initiative, which spanned Dao in March 2025 for an additional six months, which committed $ 540,000 from the treasury.
Delegates can earn up to $ 6000 per month in the distinctive icons of UNI if they meet strict criteria, including sharing at least 80 % in voting and active contribution to governance discussions.
The community has widely supported this program, with 99 % approval More than 47 million UNA in favor.
According to UISWAP governance forums, previous sessions showed an increase in participation and turnout, indicating that incentives are already paying participation.
One of the delegates summarized the logical basis and said,,
“This initiative will improve the quality of UISWAP governance by stimulating enlightened voting.”
Early data indicates that more UNI holders actively delegate their symbols to the prominent delegates, which improves the quality of governance in general and the consistency of the quorum.
Gnosissdao Voting power as a non -cash incentive
Gnissisdao adopted a different but curious approach, as a customized voting force allocated a conversion instead of direct payments.
In February 2025, DAO 10 chose two community delegates, each receiving 500 GNO of voting weight (about five percent of the offer), and depends on his active participation.
Delegates who fail to vote constantly lose their distinguished positions.
This strategy deals with the historical Gnosis problem represented by the centralization of the voters, with the aim of increasing the rate of voters by 35-50 %.
Unlike the financial incentives of the UISWAP, which is derived from the treasury boxes, the sows are basically “the distinctive symbols of governance only” to enhance decentralization A distinct solution, but it is a supplement to the indifference voters.
Makerdao and others Performance salaries and grants
Makerdao, a lead in DEFI governance, has compensated delegates for more than a year.
Using a performance -based formula, Maker spent approximately 102,000 Dai to six better delegates in January 2025 alone.
This example emphasizes that even a firm DAOS sees the merit in sharing the financially rewarding governance.
Meanwhile, the smaller or medium-sized DAOS has explored the KPI-driven bonus mechanisms or platforms to motivate and motivate participants in active governance, indicating widely accepted in industry for governance incentives.
Results and fears Does payment against governance improve the results?
Early results of promising incentives programs.
UNISWAP, for example, now meets the quorum with proposals that receive detailed logical and strong discussions from the motivated delegates.
Likewise, Gnus expects to improve participation rates.
However, there are still many decisive concerns.
Moral risks and mercenaries
Critics argue that financial incentives may attract participants in the short term in the short term only through cash gains instead of aligning the project in the long term.
However, supporters note that these rewards are relatively modest compared to the value of the enormous protocol, which puts them in their position as a fair compensation for the effort of frank bribery.
Central risk
A constant reward for a few selected risks from the delegates creates “politicians Da”, limiting the diversity of voices in the ruling.
Excessive dependence on the familiar delegates can lead to the centrality of power and decision -making unintentionally.
The cost and societal feelings
Although the UNISWAP community is an overwhelming majority of the incentives program, simple opposition voices have raised concerns about long -term sustainability and the use of possible DAO funds.
However, spending of $ 540,000 is still relatively simple, with a value of billions of treasury.
I think sustainable motivation goes beyond merely paying the participants It lies in the inclusion of incentives directly in the economic design of Dao, which is what we call a “vulnerable economy”.
This approach includes a system of automatically rewards for procedures such as submitting proposals, voting and delegation, while enabling members to set their voting rights to reliable experts or specialized sub -subsidies that focus on areas such as research or marketing.
Experts, in turn, receive rewards for their governance contributions.
This creates a self -reinforcement episode where members of society and experts and Dao shareholders benefit itself Help convert sharing from transactions to structural.
conclusion DaO governance professionalism or creation of mercenaries of governance
Gain the direction of stimulating the participation of governance through financial rewards or based on the distinctive symbol between the prominent DAOS.
Initial results indicate significant improvements in voters, the quality of participation and decentralization.
However, these benefits have accurate risks, including potential centralization and moral risks.
The final test remains: These incentives expand widely through DAO communities without the centrality of power or create a group of paid -up mercenaries?
The upcoming governance courses in UISWAP, Maker and Gnosis will provide important visions, and determine whether stimulating governance can balance a strong participation in a strong participation with real decentralization A continuous experience with high classes for the future of decentralized societies.
Roman Melnik is the chief marketing official in Dex.
Follow us twitter Facebook cable
Disclosure: The views expressed in Daily Hodl are not an investment advice. Investors must do due care before making any high -risk investments in bitcoin, cryptocurrency, or digital assets. Please note that your transfers and trading on your own responsibility, and any losses you may bear are your responsibility. Daily Hodl does not recommend buying or selling any encrypted currencies or digital assets, and Hodl Daily Andersor is an investment. Please note that the daily Hodl participates in dependent marketing.
Created Image: Midjourney
