Rabbithole campaign for Index Coop meta-governance

Summary

There is an opportunity to run a campaign with Rabbithole, to reward voters with Index tokens for participating in a meta-governance vote. While not strictly a growth activity, this will be run as a GWG experiment and uses the GWG memo format to frame the proposal.

Hypothesis:

By rewarding users who vote through the rabbithole campaign we can increase voter engagement and educate people about the Index Coop and meta-governance, as well as getting some momentum behind the use of Boardroom as a dashboard for IC voting.

Recently the Index Coop failed to reach quorum and deploy a vote on Compound-38. The proposal on Compound failed to meet quorum more generally, but as a large token holder we should be doing our best to meet our own quorum requirements. The Index Coop investment committee is focused specifically on building links to projects that underly our indexes, and our voting record is a reflection of our commitment to taking metagovernance seriously.

Boardroom will soon launch a new dashboard designed to make interacting with a project’s governance more accessible and enjoyable, something we should be acutely sensitive to as we have both internal and meta-governance votes, increasing risk of voter apathy.

We can test the hypothesis by measuring the number of tokens and unique addresses that participate in votes during the campaign. For reference, the most recent voting results are shown below:

  1. Comp 38: 23 wallets, ~29K INDEX
  2. Comp-37: 50 wallets, ~152K INDEX
  3. Comp 35 19 wallets, ~110K INDEX
  4. Uni 3: 69 wallets, ~116K INDEX

Context:

  1. Create a campaign with a single action on rabbithole.gg, to vote on an Index Coop meta-governance proposal (can be linked to snapshot in the background, but campaign link will take users to Boardroom)
  2. Track users interacting through Boardroom front-end, noting number of voters on each snapshot
  3. Run experiment for 4 weeks to give sufficient time for meta-governance proposals to take place. Current plan is first 100 unique addresses are rewarded with 1 Index token.

How to Measure:

Track the number of voters on meta-governance proposals during the campaign, through both Boardroom engagement and number of addresses/INDEX tokens being used to vote.

Funding:

100 Index will be provided as rewards to users who vote, 1 token per voter for the first 100. Rabbithole charges $2k to run the campaign bringing the total to 100 INDEX + $2k of Index at the time of payment.

*Updated to reflect increased cost

1 Like

it’s a good idea. But the risk is that it only brings “fake” vote. Because people will vote randomly. And the problem will happen again in 4 weeks.

It’s very hard to involve a full community. One possibility would be to do what Yearn did at the beginning. Stake DPI , vote, and only people who voted received some rewards.

2 Likes

Good point, this is an issue with all monetary rewards to incentivize governance. I don’t think Yearn ever surpassed 20-30% of supply being staked for governance. How does stake => vote = rewards differ from vote = rewards? Seems like you’d still run into the same issue, passive and uninformed participation.

I would argue that the campaign’s purpose wouldn’t be to incentivize holders for this specific vote, rather introduce otherwise unknowing parties to the fact that meta-governance even exists / is a feature of the coop.

2 Likes

Coming from yearn, one of the problems we faced with that approach was we ran out of proposals for people to vote on. People started complaining about not being able to unlock their rewards even though they’re still accruing them.

Example 1
Example 2

Though it might be different here since yearn was continuously allocating protocol fees to the staking contract. Plus, it’s unlikely for Index to run out of proposals since there’s so many different governance tokens here.

2 Likes

Hey Cryptouf, thanks for the input and agree for the duration of this campaign we might see some voters that don’t return.

I think the way I see it is a collaboration between Index Coop + Rabbithole + Boardroom. While this campaign will likely improve voter engagement in the short term, that’s not the only reason for doing it. We have the proposal for governance mining as the medium to long term solution to voter engagement but that is awaiting some engineering resource before we can build out the contracts for it.

In the meantime we can educate DeFi users about the fact that meta-governance is a thing, that’s where Rabbithole comes in, running the campaign with some explainers as to what metagov is and why it’s important for the Index Coop.

Beyond that, Boardroom are trying to consolidate all the many different aspects that make up governance in general, all into one good looking dashboard. This could improve the UX for DAO participants but we will have to use it as Index Coop to see if it’s right for us. You can vote on the Metaverse DG1 poll through Boardroom right now if you want to try it out!

2 Likes

Yes it’s a good point. I guess my question is: Do you think people know Rabbithole better than Idex Coop? I think Rabithole is not very famous and only very few people know it. So to me, rabithole will gain more traction with this collaboration. I’m not sure a lot of members here, who are not participating yet, will do it after the campaign. They probably will for rewards, but not sure, it’s really an issue about eduction . But I may be completely wrong ^^ it’s just my feeling.

Thanks ! i didn’t know Boardroom. Will have a look

1 Like

I really like what the team at boardroom are doing. I support any purposal to improve governance and meta governance within the Defi eco-system.

1 Like

Yes it’s a good point. I guess my question is: Do you think people know Rabbithole better than Idex Coop? I think Rabithole is not very famous and only very few people know it. So to me, rabithole will gain more traction with this collaboration. I’m not sure a lot of members here, who are not participating yet, will do it after the campaign. They probably will for rewards, but not sure, it’s really an issue about eduction . But I may be completely wrong ^^ it’s just my feeling.

Hey! Co-founder of RabbitHole here. Just wanted to chime in - we have over 5,000 addresses who completed tasks across several DeFi applications and have done campaigns with Gnosis, Aave, OpenSea, Matcha, and mStable. We get tons of interest for our campaigns and are considered one of the best DeFi education platforms in web3. We’re working on tons of product improvements at the moment which will let us grow our userbase even more.

I defintiely think we will be able to draw in 100 users to do this campaign (who are BrightID verified for sybil resistance), and think we could even do up to 500 if we wanted.

We also write a post about how DeFi projects can use us and what our roadmap looks like here: How RabbitHole can help DeFi projects create more sustainable networks | by Rabbit Hole | Feb, 2021 | Medium

Let me know if you have any questions about RabbitHole, happy to answer!

2 Likes

I’m a bit lost :pensive: what role does Boardroom play in testing Rabbithole to drive metagovernance participation?

I don’t quite get the connection but want to learn!

@gregdocter i think it’s the other way around. the rabbithole campaign will push folks to vote using boardroom’s UI. And that’s good because of this.

And also this

2 Likes

To be honest I don’t know but what I have noticed with most projects in crypto is that we are still refining our products and the only way we can do that is by experimenting. Rabbithole and Boardroom do not have the perfect product offering but I know that they’re founders are working every day to refine it but the only way the can do that is if they try solve real problems, hence them reaching out to us and participating in our forum. I do not look at projects for how and what they are doing. For me it is more about why are they doing it. And if Boardroom and Rabbithole sole purpose in the crypto eco-system is to improve governance and governance participation we should be putting resources behind them as a project because we cannot solve the governance problem by our selves we need to collaborate with other projects who are passionate about governance like we are.

4 Likes