Please describe your proposed solution.
Extended Problem Statement:
Voters in the Cardano community face challenges in making informed decisions due to the overwhelming number of proposals, compounded by a lack of trust in community reviews. Evaluations of Fund 10 reveal low participation rates and limited engagement, indicating a fundamental issue in assessing the reliability of individuals and parties within an open system. The absence of a straightforward reputation system poses a risk to the quality of collective decisions within the Catalyst ecosystem, even with the introduction of DReps.
Evaluations of Fund 10 show:
- Less than 15% of registered wallets voted
- Only 15% of voters voted for 1 proposal
- Only 22% of voters voted for more than 25 proposals (that is only 2,8% of total registered wallets)
Source: <https://twitter.com/LidoNation/status/1709916495550030191>
The fundamental issue is that assessing the trustworthiness and reliability of individual persons and parties in an open system requires great efforts. Trustless systems that involve human actions and interactions require some sort of process to build reputation. Without a simple reputation system that makes past actions and decisions visible and links them to their outcomes, Catalyst is prone to poor collective decisions and runs the risk of not supporting the best teams and ideas.
Proposed Solution
To address these challenges, our proposed solution involves a comprehensive approach:
1. Research:
Utilizing data from previous funding rounds up to Fund 10, we conduct a thorough analysis. Leveraging Catalyst Testnet, Ideascale Platform, Milestone Reporting, and Community Reviewing data, we aim to:
- Establish correlations between reviews, voting decisions, and proposal outcomes.
- Develop a knowledge graph and perform a graph/network analysis to identify quality reviewers and voters.
The current available data set (cast a wide net of catalyst data):
2. Proof of Concept (POC):
We will develop a framework as a proof of concept to link roles, expertise and reputation. Starting with the [proposal, reviewer] role, we will generate reputation. Reputation will be integrated and published to the lidonation catalyst explorer tool as a badge and filter. The [proposal, reviewer] role can serve as a template to build reputation for other catalyst roles in the future.
Building upon the research phase, the Proof of Concept (POC) is a crucial step in demonstrating the feasibility and effectiveness of our proposed reputation system within the Catalyst ecosystem. The POC involves the following key components:
a. Framework Development:
- Objective: Develop a functional framework that establishes a clear link between roles, expertise, and reputation.
- Implementation Steps: Leverage the analyzed data to define the criteria for reputation generation and to develop algorithms that consider factors such as the accuracy of reviews, consistency in voting decisions, and the successful completion of proposed milestones.
b. Reputation Generation:
- Objective: Implement the reputation generation process based on the defined criteria.
- Methodology: Utilize the algorithms to assign reputation scores to reviewers and voters. The reputation should reflect the historical accuracy of reviews, alignment with successful proposals, and consistency in voting decisions.
c. Integration with Catalyst Explorer:
- Objective: Showcase the generated reputation within the lidonation catalyst explorer tool as a badge and filter.
- User Interface Design: Implement an intuitive and user-friendly interface that allows community members to easily interpret and navigate the reputation information and to ensure seamless integration with the existing Catalyst Explorer for a cohesive user experience.