PEP-42: Reward and Decentralise (RAD)

Edited 09/20 to change BAG Holders to Foundation.



TLDR: PEP-42 secures a budget for one-off contributor activities via a Pocket DAO bounty program through the end of 2022 with the initial goals of supporting contributions to the V0/V1 protocols and some small collaboration experiments between external contributors and core team functions (i.e., potential Reddit moderation, Event Ambassadorships or others TBC). Pending the success of this program, the authors intend to work with the community to seek an annual budget to fund contributor bounties through 2023.


  • Provide more paid opportunities for DAO participants and community members – Ecosystems are emergent and must pursue opportunities for value creation flexibly and rapidly to help Pocket capture this value. Packaging discrete and emergent work into bounties and incentivising contributions can create more momentum in having the community contribute to Pocket in new and meaningful ways.
  • Further progressively decentralise Pocket Network’s workforce – By creating a wider range of available tasks for participation, we can establish relationships with new builders and participants that can build long-term value for the network. We see bounties as a way for people to start entering and contributing to the Pocket Network via the DAO and beginning a pathway to building more complex contributions or associated businesses.
  • More closely fuse Pocket Network, Inc. team activities with the DAO – Decentralising more work will further enmesh the community and core teams in the most important thing - working together. These types of work experiences not only can generate value in task completion but more empathy and trust and greater visibility to both the community and core teams.
  • Learn through small-scale experiments how to optimise contributor experiences and work collaborations, including onboarding, payments, etc. – We are at the start of decentralising work at Pocket. The whole ecosystem of web3 is grappling with challenges around onboarding, payments, accountability, growth, and many other things that web2 or traditional companies take for granted. By creating more of these discrete experiments, we can benefit from more learning opportunities and start to build playbooks that can optimise our ability to work in this way.

Operational Considerations & How it works

We will identify a (hopefully) increasing number of contribution opportunities for external collaboration with Pocket Network, Inc (PNI). We will also, where possible, use this bounty program to help action community suggestions that are provided by the IDEAS mechanism outlined in PEP41.

The DAO will make these opportunities for community and external contributions visible to all via Dework. Dework acts as a middle layer for community contributions and integrates with existing tools like Discord and GitHub, limiting friction with existing workflows as we scale. It is also a Web3 native product that can accept token payments, NFT gating, and other functionality that will allow us to scale over time.

We aim to create pathways for both permissioned and permissionless contributions. That is:

  • Permissioned: People apply to take up contribution bounties to the Pocket DAO via Dework
  • Permissionless: Trusted contributors who have achieved certain trust/role thresholds can self-assign work bounties without the need to apply or seek approval

These contributions will be completed for the Pocket DAO and will be supported by the following accountability mechanism:

  • CREWmates: All bounty contributors will have CREWmate. CREW stands for Contributor Rewards and Effective Work. The CREWmate is the main point of contact for support of the bounty contributor and is the person who will review and sign off on the successful completion of work. The CREWmate will be assigned and communicated to the contributor at the commencement of their work by the Head of DAO Talent.

The Bounty Contributor’s CREWmate is their main connection point should support be needed when completing their work. The CREWmate has discretion to approve that work has been completed to a satisfactory standard for payment and the Head of DAO Talent will work with contributors and their CREWmate to help ensure the most effective outcomes. Work can be paid for completion, pre-agreed value, or milestone payments, but not solely for the effort expended - we reward results.

Note: Over time, we will further define the nature of contributor relationships, systems access, and other needs as relevant to completing the work and provide guides and playbooks that should facilitate the improved and rapid integration of community contributors.

We will document as much as possible, work in the open by default and provide monthly updates to the community via the Foundation through this forum to update the community on work assigned, results achieved, and funds disbursed.


We are proposing 600,000 $POKT from the DAO treasury be allocated to the above described bounty program with the goal of funding 50 tasks across 10+ contributors.

How did we arrive at this figure?

Estimating the speed of operation, aliasing this can be difficult, particularly as we incentivise new types of contributions. Because of the broad range of possible types of contributors (highly technical to non-technical) our logic is based on task hours. We have priced this budget on expectation of:

  • Months of funding required: 4
  • Contributor goal: 10+
  • Task Completion Goal: 50
  • Average task size: XtraSmall (XS) to Medium (M); Some Large (L)
    • XS = 1-2 hours (10%) - $50-100 = $500
    • S = 3-6 hours (30%) - $150-300 = $4500
    • M = 1-3 days (50%) - $400-1200 = $30,000
    • L = 4-8 days (10%) - $1200-3200 = $16,000
  • Estimated Contributor breakdown:
    • 5 V1 developer contributors (40% of tasks) - 20 tasks
    • 2-5 V0 developer contributors (10% of tasks) - 5 tasks
    • 5 community contributors (20% of tasks) - 10 tasks
    • 5 Marketing contributors (20% of tasks) - 10 tasks
    • 5 Experimental contributors (10% of tasks) - 5 tasks
  • Average Contributor Rate: $50/hr

Note that these are approximations to help us calibrate the budget requested. The actual distribution of task type/value may differ.

Total for 50 tasks: $62,600 = ~600,000 POKT

Payment currency & mechanics

Payment will be a 50% Split $POKT/$USDC . 50% of the total budget will be converted to $USDC at initial funding to act as a hedge against price movements during this period.

We want to incentivise owning and holding POKT, but we need to hedge against possible price movements during this period and be pragmatic that many web3 contributors today have expectations to be paid in ERC20 tokens due to their convenience for living and operating expenses.

The Foundation will be responsible for maintaining the budgeted funds. They will make monthly payments after a reconciliation of bounties approved in Dework by relevant CREWmate.


The main deliverables of this proposal will be:

  • Systematised bounty contribution mechanism via Dework
  • Increased number of rewarded community contributions (Goal: 50 tasks / 10+ Contributors)
  • Status reporting on WIP activity and results (both contributions and value generated/saved for the Pocket Network)
  • Documented learnings from contribution experiences to underpin a set of guides and playbooks for community contributions

Dissenting Opinions

  • The requested budget is too high
    • The anticipated work will need to be completed by someone. This request is lower than the cost of hiring Full Time employees in terms of salary costs, attraction costs (hiring, recruiting), and time costs (time to hire, interview process etc.)
  • There aren’t enough checks and balances
    • We have defined the role of CREWmate who will be the person responsible for accepting that work has reached the standard required for payment for the work. In addition, the Foundation will need to complete their own check and acceptance of the work provided prior to making payments and reporting to the DAO
    • Hiring full-time employees means fewer checks and balances within the community because it is by its nature more opaque. We want transparency to act as a driver of accountability.
  • We don’t need to focus on this now
    • Accelerating our ability to deliver the v1 protocols development, and supporting other types of contributions is a high priority. We are an ecosystem for builders and we want to ensure that building with Pocket is a primary focus for the DAO


Copyright and related rights waived via CC0.


I support this proposal 100%. This is a great move to further community / core team collaboration while clarifying priorities. Exactly what we need in my opinion.


I also support this proposal. I do have a question and a couple suggestions.

Question: Will CREWmates and BAG holders be entirely composed of PNI employees or will there by non-PNI DAO representation?

Suggestion 1: For both this and for PEP-41 , I would like to see monthly AMA / status calls to let the community know what is working well, what isn’t working as intended, what pivots are needed, share success cases, report what percentage of the budget has been spent etc…rather than wait for the 4 months to pass before issuing a final report. Such call could be joint PEP-41,42; no need for separate calls. I would like to see the inclusion of something like this added to the scope of each proposal

Suggestion 2: I would like to see a portion of the budget (say 10-20%) of each of PEP-41 and this proposal be available to fund worthy suggestions and contributions, respectively, outside of adherence to the DeWork workflow but rather via more informal mechanisms such as completely at the discretion of the BAG holders. Part of the prototype is to evaluate the utility of DeWork for this kind of effort, and I do not see how that aspect can be evaluated without a non-dework baseline to compare it to (quality and quantity of suggestions and contributions, how much red-tape the dework flow adds, etc, how problematic is the scalability of an informal system, etc)

1 Like

Good questions/suggestions.

CREWmates and BAG Holders will be composed of the authors of the proposal (who are all members of PNI) for now. It is my strong desire to use this experience to systematise such work that we can extend these responsibilities beyond PNI (particularly the role of BAG Holders).

Monthly AMA and status calls are great and already within our plans. For a budgeted proportion to be outside of Dework, I do think it’s a good idea to have some discretion (I already know of some work that might be bountied “retroactively”) but generally think we should report transparently on where those needs arise rather than proactively plan for them

I support this proposal but will add a little bit in general how I feel about this

Personally, I think $50/hr (varies on location, and whatnot…) is on the lower end given that most of the tasks for bounties are for building out the early stages of our next gen protocol. This will pretty much require some specialized expertise/knowledge down the road. To be clear, I highly spite paying devs per hour, especially in the early stages.

$50/hr down the road whenever V1 is established and a large foundation is already there? Hell yeah, I’d gladly take down some bounties for the lols, spend a couple hours coding to pay for my coffee, dinner, etc. Why not? But right now, V1 is still in the early stages of the foundation, and everyone knows that the early ones tend to be compensated on the higher end (if everything plays out the way it should, doesn’t have to be immediate)

Overall though, it’s a step forward to using the DAO funds to help us accelerate our goal to V1 and decentralized RPC access in general. But in my opinion, the satisfaction to take on these bounties aren’t that attractive, unless you have significant bags already in POKT (or in vesting). And I presume that’s half of the reason why the Core devs are in it to win it :slight_smile:


I support this proposal without reservation.


This is pretty cool. Will the bountie amount be shown on each task?


Yes. As much as possible bounties will show a price, or alternatively there is an option for contributors to suggest /offer a price


This is an interesting approach to accelerate the community contribution, I support this proposal.

1 Like

Hey @poktblade! Thanks for your great contributions to the discussion, as always :pray:

I tend to agree with you re: V1 contributions, and developer contributions in general. I was trying to find a normalization for an average since we plan on experimenting with other bounty types with this budget (marketing, community management, etc.) so I based it on a $100k/year USD average, which is commiserate with high CoL cities like NYC, although perhaps slightly below the average for other US metros like LA.

We tried to cover the variance with this disclaimer:

Note that these are approximations to help us calibrate the budget requested. The actual distribution of task type/value may differ.

Even with the $50/hr average to calculate and justify the funding amount requested, it will not be a flat distribution by task type or contributor type but fairly subjective (and ideally an open dialogue between the CREWmates and bounty hunters as part of assigning tasks).

Our current goal with the V1 bounties is to focus on valuable starter tasks to make sure efforts are commiserate with rewards as another means of balancing the distribution of this initial program funding.

As tasks grow in complexity and commitment, we prove results and get more funding, and work on monetizing core contributions in a more fluid way, I think that those operating in a more consultative fashion have grounds to make a case for a higher bounty rewards and even propose tasks via this mechanism and name their price. And I welcome and encourage dialogues like these starting with these initial bounties as we learn.

I personally am always happy to pay top $ (and POKT!) for developer contributions and look forward to negotiating these specifics with you and other contributors as we start mapping tasks to rewards (wen DAO vote?? :slightly_smiling_face:) and expanding the bounty program together.

Thank you again for your support and feedback!


This proposal is now up for voting Snapshot


A few questions as voting winds down. Who is - or who appoints - the “Head of DAO Talent”? And what’s a “BAG” holder?

1 Like

Thanks for these questions. My role is as “Head of DAO Talent” so it refers to me :slight_smile:

Edit: Bag Holders were proposed as a mechanism for administering payments. The proposal was edited prior to voting so that the Foundation will administer payments (in place of the Bag Holders).
Further details will be provided on the operations of this and apologies for the confusion (which can be attributed partly to covid brain and mostly to my inattention to detail :smiling_face_with_tear:)

With the voting now closed and approved I want to say thankyou for your confidence in us to further activate the community through this proposal.

This proposal was approved with 18 approvals and 0 rejections. Snapshot