Proposed Engagement: Delphi Digital

As we take on more people and pay people with Rally tokens … is there not a conflict of interest when we reward tokens that have voting power?

Can you be more precise around what you perceive as the conflict here? Is it that RLY based compensation empowers them to vote on proposals? I’m not sure I follow.
What it does do in my mind is align incentives to improve the network, while also limiting the drawdown of the community treasury. It also invites them to participate further in governance and further develop Rally’s network.
I think it strikes a fair balance here, but definitely open to arguments and thoughts against to be weighed against the pros that seem self-evident here.

What I did highlight in another post that is a related point, is that I feel strongly against terms that require a community vote to act to end an engagement. And that without a clear rational, the standard should be to require a vote to renew terms that allows all parties to review the value of the partnership and make any changes that seem fit. In this instance, I recognize the tremendous value that will be provided over by Delphi over the next three months, but see undo risk in an agreement to continue the partnership beyond that in perpetuity without necessitating a reassessment that goes to a community vote. The community can’t properly weigh the value of “Performance review updates” for 3 months from now and beyond, so it seems most reasonable for us to weigh that decision with an informed proposal and vote in 3 months - not baked into this one. Requiring a vote after 3 months here would ensure a continued alignment between parties. I invite a broader discussion on this with a reminder that I’m advocating for a broader principle to apply to all parties we engage, current and future, beyond Delphi.

1 Like

my comment centers around on the lack of real voting or involvement from the whole community. If you are awarded 50k a month in rally tokens after 6m you have a meaningful say. If I was receiving those tokens I would be more than happy to use those voting rights to help pass votes if it aligns with the company that hires me.

Hey everyone, Jose here from Delphi Digital. Huge fans of what Rally is doing and looking forward to working closely with the community and team on the token economics and incentives

@martinmartin we will definitely be exploring the NFT side as well as we agree this is potentially a very important part of the strategy

@sixmofo in our view being paid in RLY tokens actually serves to align incentives as we’re encouraged to make Rally as successful as possible. You raise an interesting point regarding our independence. If it helps, we’ve been paid in tokens by the majority of projects we’ve worked with including Aave, Synthetix, Balancer, Aragon, and others. Our primary goal as an organization is to help drive the crypto space forward and our participation / voting is always guided by that. In the past, we have voted against teams if we believed that to be the right call (e.g. see our participation in the successful ANJ --> ANT merger)

Grand, we agree with this and would be happy for renewal of this proposal to requite another community vote

2 Likes

Thanks @jose_delphi! A warm welcome to the Rally community and don’t hesitate to reach out for assistance with your efforts!

1 Like

It’s a hefty price tag, but you have to pay for quality. Delphi is one of the pioneering research teams in the space!

1 Like

Fully in favor of this engagement. Delphi is top of class when it comes to designing the world’s best token models.

In the case of Rally, their work around bonding curve mechanics and sound economics is something I’m excited to see unfold.

Looking forward to watching this closely and contributing alongside @kevindelphi and @jose_delphi where I can!

2 Likes

First question would be why we need a redesign, can we adress the problems with the actual design first?

Second Question would be can we lock the rewards they get for at least some time?

1 Like

The current reward system is not incentivizing the behavior we want, nor is it rewarding the creator/community in the way that we want. A more in depth analysis & rationale behind the changes can be found here: Rewards Evolution

Hi Kevin,

Did you have a look what Superfarm did? They Launched NFT’s and these NFT’s:

  • Generate Tokens over time, their Super token. So you invest now, the longer you stay “on board” the more income you generate.
  • Generate free NFT drops
  • Give acces to extras.

A model like this might work for the Creators in Rally. Fan NFT’s (that show visualy you are a big fan, could be a picture/artwork). Next to this status it generates income over time for the fans, the bigger fan the higher income. It could increase fan loyalty and community participation dramatically. Next to that these NFT’s could e.g. give you VIP acces or entitle you on token drops of similar Creator coins.

The creator could choose to allocate X% of it’s future supply to NFT rewards. In that way they can receive money now with the sale of NFT and lock in fan’s for a long time.

I’m not a big Superfarm fan (for other reasons) but I liked what they did here. But you are the expert! Good luck.

2 Likes

I’ve been checking it out since you mentioned here. Thanks for the heads up

We’re very focused on building out NFTs, which we’ve been working on for 2 years actually at Rally. Stay tuned!

1 Like

Yes, very interesting model. Going to dig deeper into this and will come back with more fleshed out thoughts. Thanks for the suggestion!

1 Like

@kevindelphi, @jose_delphi

Hi Kevin and Jose - I have heard that you’ve been working hard with Core Rally team behind the scenes!
With the prospect of very impactful creators joining the network in the coming weeks/months, your efforts to provide more optionality for Creators, and more generally optimize the network will be more important than ever. I think the Rally community is eager to weigh in and move forward!

Are there any updates that you can share with the community, or thoughts on relevant discussions in the forums or discord over the past couple months?

Cheers,
Grand

1 Like

Hey @Grand - drafting up a forum post on our initial examination + proposals as we speak! Will include links to the documentation as well. Really looking forward to the community’s feedback.

2 Likes

WOO! Can’t wait! :smiley:

You all put in some serious work! I will review the white paper in detail first thing next week and get back to you all with any questions and much praise. So pumped! Thanks!

1 Like

Sounds great! Really looking forward to hearing your thoughts and feedback.

Hey @kevindelphi, Jason from Rally here. Is it possible to offer staking only for launch buys? Essentially if you want to buy a new coin within first say 7 days, you can only buy if you agree to stake for a set period of time, like 10 days (or longer).

1 Like

Hey @jasonzm - yes, I believe that’s possible. In line with our optional pre-sale proposal, those who choose to participate in the pre-sale would be subject to some kind of predetermined vesting / lockup period, which is similar to staking RLY for the option to buy CCs at the pre-sale price.

Does that answer your question or are you talking about something different?

Yes, that sounds about right. Thanks!