[1IP 100] Recognized Delegate Program Renewal

[Baer.eth_DAOplomats]

Hey @0xpranav welcome to 1inch DAO,

@0xpranav

Tier 1 compensation is unanswered
The revised proposal didn’t address the question on Tier 1 compensation.

Your (Core’s) concern about this tier is already addressed in my previous comment to @RoundElephant. Just quoting it again.

I also want to add that I don’t want the 1inch DAO delegates program to be an elite club like how it is in Aave or other ‘DAOs’. This program should meaningfully enable delegates to be active in the DAO.

I could foresee a situation where current delegates who are in Tier 1 or working towards Tier 1 stop contributing if we make it hard to join the program.

@Baer.eth_DAOplomats

7. Tier 1 compensation

Keeping Tier 1 at $100/month and being explicit about why in v2: it’s not meant as fair compensation for the workload — it’s an on-ramp and a recognition rung. The intent is to gamify progression. A delegate putting in the work to read proposals, attend calls, and post rationales will quickly accumulate enough points to climb to Tier 2 ($1,000) or Tier 3 ($4,000). Tier 1 exists to lower the barrier to entry for new contributors and create visible upward motion, not to be a destination. Rationale added to the Compensation section so intent is on the record.

@0xpranav

Evaluator independence
The multi-sig sign-off by Foundation reps is an improvement over the original version. But DAOplomats still produces the evaluation metrics that determine their own tier placement.

The original aim was for DAOplomats to consolidate publicly available information and present it to the Ops working group (ergo: the Multisig).

But recently the DAO has approved $200,000 in USDC for the 1inch Foundation to coordinate the governance and one of the mandates also includes governance reporting.

@1inch_Foundation

Community engagement and governance reporting

IMO it’s the logical next step for the foundation to take care of the reporting aspect for the delegates program and present it to the Operations committee.

@0xpranav

$20,000/month cap, ambiguous scope

The proposal explicitly states that the maximum allocated fund is $20,000 per month. If more delegates get qualified, there will be a tiebreaker and others have to wait until more slots get freed (either by delegates climbing down the ladder or until the next cycle). Under no circumstances can the program spend more than $20,000 per month.

@DAOplomats

In case there are less than 5 T3 delegates, other permutations and combinations of tiers can exist as long as the max. monthly doesn’t exceed $20,000/month from the first review onwards.

Maximum theoretical exposure with 5 delegates at Tier 3: $20,000/month after the first evaluation at the end of August 2026. If the budget is exhausted before all qualifying positions fill, additional qualifiers wait until the next budget cycle.

@0xpranav

Conflict of interest — no enforcement mechanism
The COI disclosure requirement is a good addition. But the removal procedure doesn’t list a COI violation as a trigger for removal or tier downgrade.

Disclosure of conflicts of interest is mentioned as a responsibility of the delegate. A delegate is removed by the Ops multisig if they aren’t fulfilling their responsibilities. Any DAO member can sight the breach on the forum and ask to be removed all accordance with the DAO guidelines. That also means, breach of responsibilities will lead to a complete removal and not a simple downgrading.

@DAOplomats

• Full removal from the program requires a OPS WG sign-off (simple majority). Initiation may come from the OPS WG following quarterly evaluation, or from any DAO member via forum post citing a breach of responsibilities.