Following the Rewards Distribution for Praise post here’s a proposal of what the calculation of rewards would look like to reduce the rewards for paid contributors and give a bonus for non-contributors.
We take into consideration the 5 different tiers of contributors from the vesting distribution plus the non-contributors:
And we designate a percentage to each tier that we are going to call
We apply the corresponding
contributor factor to each of the praise rewards recipients and we divide the amount we get by the sum of all refactored rewards, this gets the share % of each contributor for the total praise rewards.
We then multiply our original sum by this share % to get their final adjusted amount
Here’s an example spreadsheet of the calculation for the first round of distribution. There is a function to lookup for contributor names by discord handle by a separate list and check if they are receiving rewards. If it returns true we apply the factor, if not, we don’t apply the factor, this should make it more practical to implement. You can see an example list in the sheet labelled
contributors . Check it out!
The idea of acknowledging and incentivizing contributions made by non-contributors is a powerful one, as it can help to level the playing field and promote more equal participation. By offering bonuses to those who have contributed, regardless of their level of involvement, we can help to create a more inclusive and collaborative environment.
Should we use this method to re-calculate the rewards distribution for Praise?
- Yes, let’s do it!
- No, I have some concerns and I’ll comment below
Thanks for putting it together. One comment:
AFAIK - “GIVaholic” contributors are not getting paid for more thatn 40 hrs/week. For example, my role proposal says 35-40 hrs/week and I get a salary based on this. However, I’m generally considered GIVahollic because I work more than that every week… I just don’t get paid for the extra hrs. @freshelle can confirm - but we should base the
contributor factor based on how many hrs they are actually getting paid for - and I think no one is getting paid to work like a machine… so we should eliminate this category.
Also I think it is worthwhile just making 2 categories - paid contributors and not paid contributors… I think it makes us more decentralized in our payment structure to give more rewards to people who are getting no compensation and are getting praised for adding value. We could even say paid contributors get 50% and unpaid get 100% - for example. I don’t know the best way, but I think we should discuss.
Yes, I agree with Lauren. I think
Full Time should be under one tier since both kinds of contributors are being paid under a full-time contract (~160 hours a month).
I think the context for the tiers in the vesting distribution was to reward more those who worked beyond 160 hours a month as a way to compensate for not being paid overtime hours.
Now for this current proposal, the rewarding of quantifiers is based on how much is actually being paid to the contributor/quantifier.
Thank you for the feedback @karmaticacid and @freshelle !!
I see your point, when I took into consideration the different tiers I did it importing the idea from TEC, but I see that it may not apply in Giveth’s case.
@freshelle Just to be clear, this re-calculation is applied to the rewards that the praise receivers get only from Praise. In case of the Quantifiers this doesn’t affect the extra 7% they get from quantifying (it is added after the calculation). So if you’re a paid contributor and also a quantifier during a particular round, the contributor factor would only affect the rewards you got from the praise dished to you (that portion that corresponds to the 90% of the distribution) and the rewards you are getting from quantifying doesn’t change.
@karmaticacid I like your idea about creating less categories. I would propose to take it down to 3 categories maybe. Something like:
Paid contributors (this includes GIVaholic, Full Time and Part Time) - 50%
Very part time contributors (Part part time and Casual) - 100%
Non-contributors - 150%
What do you think?
I agree that a 3x bump is worth it for non-contributors, but part time and casual should get way less than double the contributors that work more.
I have a strong strong preference for avoiding any “deductions” and making sure that everything is framed around positive adjustments as opposed to negative adjustments… Negative adjustments seem to cause a lot more conflict, and its unnecessary.
Here is how I would adjust it:
Part-time, Full Time and GIVaholics: 100%
Part-Part-Time & Casual: 125%
Non contributors: 300%
I’d also be down for:
Part-time, Full Time and GIVaholics Part-Part-Time & Casual: 100%
Non contributors: 500%
I like @Griff 's framing for positive adjustments. I would shoot for something like:
Giveth contributors: 100%
keeping it simple.
Thanks @Griff and @Suga for your feedback!
I’ve been playing with the numbers and the spreadsheet and I think that Suga’s suggestion about keeping it simple is a good way to go:
Paid contributors: 100%
So we don’t penalize paid contributors and we are able to give a bonus to non-contributors.
Should we use these parameters to re-calculate Praise Rewards in Giveth?
- Yes, it looks good!
- No, I have some concerns and I’ll comment below