RFC-XX: Reducing Recognized Delegate Voting Weight Requirement


This proposal aims to address concerns about the current requirement for maintaining a 90,000 HOP voting weight to be eligible for delegate compensation. We propose decreasing the voting weight requirement to ensure the delegate program remains accessible to the broader Hop DAO community.


During the last community call, there were valid concerns that the current requirement of maintaining a 90,000 HOP voting weight to be eligible for delegate compensation is currently too high and has excluded several community members from participating to ensure that the delegate program is accessible to the entire Hop DAO community at an intermediate level, we propose decreasing the voting weight requirement.


We propose three options for the new required delegate voting weight requirement:

  • 30,000 HOP
  • 40,000 HOP
  • 50,000 HOP

0 voters

Next Steps

Once consensus is reached that this requirement must be lowered, this proposal will be put to a vote on Snapshot to determine the new required HOP token amount for becoming a Hop Recognized Delegate.

1 Like

I think the lower the better, but we need to be mindful about effecting distributions; i.e., too low and the number of rewards going out monthly could become prohibitive, especially since MS will have to verify batches manually. 30,000 seems decently low while still limiting this kind of burden.

We are planning to apply for the Recognized Delegate program and a reduction in the threshold will definately help new entrants ease into the process. Thank you for the suggestion @Kene_StableLab

1 Like

This is now HIP 35, up for vote on Snapshot

I voted for 30,000. Agree with the other two comments here–the lower the better to some threshold and that threshold is probably around here. We can always keep tweaking it.

Voted 40,000 and was tempted to go 50,000. I would love to have more small holders participate and I know the 90K limit was arbitrary, but I’m generally in favor of incremental approaches and an over 50% slash seems like a lot.

My main concern is this incentivizes Sybil accounts to create a lot of noise in the forum without contributing anything meaningful and ends up actually hurting the broader dialogue around proposals.

Voted for 30,000. I’m all for attracting more delegates and increasing governance participation.

Sybil accounts could be an issue, though putting the summary of RFCs, votes, and associated commentary together for each periods compensation is not trivial and might dissuade this.

Voted for 40,000. Looks like a good balance, and, considering that it is cutting more than 50% of the previous threshold (90,000), in my opinion it’s a good starting point.

I have voted for 30,000 as the threshold. I don’t believe sybil attacks will be that effective, at least at the current size of the project, so the lowest option works for me as anything we can do to attract new delegates should be good for long-term success

1 Like

I would have also voted for 30,000 but somehow did not get any notification for this vote or missed it due to travelling for EthCC.

Edit: Seems HAL no longer sends emails for HOP for some reason (?)

1 Like