Addition of a 3-month report requirement for P-Reps


#1

On Aug 26, 2019, ICON Foundation Published Version 1.0 of Contribution Proposal System Paper. This paper outlines the goals and intent of the ICON Network, and explains what Proof of Contribution means, and why it is important for the success of the network.

Proof of Stake is used in many networks with the intent to reward the supporters of the network and to secure the network.
Proof of Contribution expands upon Proof of Stake in order to reward everyone who contributes to the network, by providing rewards based on contribution.

P-Reps are responsible to run a node, but also are expected to go beyond and contribute to the network. It is important for P-Reps to state their plans for contribution and also follow-up with status on their contributions so that ICONists can quickly get a status of the state of each P-Rep. We don’t want to turn this into a bureaucratic status drill, but feel it is important to provide regular updates. As such, we propose a 3-month report requirement for each P-Rep, to ensure the information for ICONists is up to date, and not stale.

Our proposal idea is for a brief standardized 3-month report that gives a proper overview of the status of each P-Rep team. We think that 3-month is enough time for every P-Rep to show a strong contribution to ICON space but at distant enough intervals to not get in the way of regular production.


#2

Totally agree with this and 3 Months seems to be the right time frame.


#3

I agree with this as well! Not everyone can spend as much time is they’d like keeping up with everyone on the different mediums. Getting a quarterly update on what the teams have been up to would be great!


#4

Frequency is not an issue, we wouldn’t mind 1 month reports either. Standardization of such reports is the main challenge.


#5

Yes, standardized reporting will indeed be difficult. The main purpose of this is to ensure P-Reps have some consistency and obligation to provide voters an overview of what they have been doing. A minimal template with flexibility to go beyond and in much greater detail is what we are thinking.


#6

I support the template + freedom to expound more in whatever format idea @thelionshire

Also I think monthly is a little much. We tried monthly but the cadence with which development happens, monthly reports might not be fitting.