[Signal Request] Should we trial Delegate Compensation as described in MIP61 over 3 months?

As I shared previously on one of the other delegate compensation threads, I think the best path forward with Recognised Delegate compensation is to run a 3 month trial period according to the system proposed by @psychonaut in MIP61.


  • It gets compensation into the hands of Recognised Delegates sooner than waiting for the monthly governance process.
  • It allows us to adjust the system over the three months as necessary to attract and compensate delegates.
  • If it fails in a corruptive way (attracting low-quality delegates solely interested in compensation,) we can allow it to lapse after 3 months.


  • Blurs the line between governance processes.
  • Doesn’t give Recognised Delegates much stability with respect to future compensation.
Should we trial Recognised Delegate compensation as described in MIP61 over the next 3 months?
  • Yes
  • No
  • Abstain

0 voters

Assuming this signal request and subsequent on-chain poll pass, compensation will cover November - February.

Next Steps
This signal poll will end on 2021-10-21T00:00:00Z, at which point if there are more ‘Yes’ votes than ‘No’ votes, it will move to an on-chain poll.


Suppose this signal request and on-chain poll are affirmed. Does MIP61 need to wait until Jan 2022 to enter the governance cycle?

On the other hand, if this signal request fails then

  • MIP61 will enter the governance cycle Nov 2021?
  • Payments would start one month later (December), but continue indefinitely?

I don’t think it’s a big deal either way. I’m just trying to clarify possible futures.

It should follow the normal rules for MIPs. Though I would recommend not submitting it during the trial. If need be we can extend the trial if people are happy while we wait for the MIP to go through the process.

Can I get an idea why people are abstaining on this issue? @Katie @alexis @jernejml @miha @Frank_Brinkkemper could any of you share how you’re thinking about this?

Hey hey, just wanted to see the result. Curiousity …


I am abstaining, since i am not very active lately and don’t know much about the issue.
Wanted to see the result also.


Note that MIP61 has now changed with respect to the compensation amounts as described here.

Please be aware that this changes the parameters of the trial, and that if this signal (and subsequent on-chain poll) are successful, compensation will begin at that larger amount (144k DAI maximum per recognised delegate per year.)


Note this is no longer true and I’ll be creating a signal request for the issue of higher compensation separately. If this passes we will pay max 48k as was originally laid out in the MIP.

1 Like

I’m confused. I think you wrote elsewhere that if the on-chain poll to do the trial passes and the signal request for 144k DAI max passes then the trial will use the 144k DAI number as the delegate compensation.

There are now two signal requests. This signal request and subsequent on-chain poll determine whether we’re trialling delegate compensation over 3 months at the originally proposed 48k maximum compensation.

This still-active signal request will determine whether we increase the trial compensation to 144k. If the forum-poll stage is successful it will also go up as an on-chain poll.

Does that clear up the confusion?

1 Like

Despite abstaining on forums, I intend to vote for this on-chain poll.

I’m probably going to get a lot of flack for this, getting delegated enough MKR to pass a poll and then voting for your own compensation is a really bad look IMHO. With that in mind, I figured I’d explain my reasoning for my vote on this trial while we wait for optimal gas pricing.

Yes — Reasoning

It’s just trial, at the end we can determine if it succeeded, failed, or needs revision. More importantly, delaying this is a bad idea, we’ve been talking about compensation for months and we’re losing our better-performing delegates. We could barely pass the recent exec which is no bueno. With that in mind, I’m gonna vote yes for the trial in the hopes that we can come up with a more sophisticated model. (Look at that! Cautious optimism playing out in real-time folks!)

If MKR holders choose to vote this poll down that’s ok by me too.

Compensation model comments

This SR for outsized pay is only missing one part of the model: commitment. I’ll go post over there too.

I believe that as a community we can come up with a structure that takes MIP61 and captures most delegates’ desired involvement. From there we create minimum performance commitments with compensation that adjusts well. I personally never wanted to go full-time as a delegate, so if I’m streamed something unreasonable as a result of today’s MKR shuffling, I’m just going to give it back to the DAO.


This signal poll passed on-chain here. Thanks to those who voted.

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.