P-Rep.Community is live! New community tool for ICON voters


We (Pocket/Figment) just released a community tool to streamline how voters research P-Reps. To have informed voting, ICONists are encouraged to vet and research each of the 50+ P-Rep proposals. Upon our analysis, the average proposal takes 40+ minutes to properly:

1.Verify background and past work
2.Find a track record of accomplishments relevant to proposed action items

It would be difficult and time consuming for the average individual to source and analyze the required data to be an informed voter. Pocket/Figment has ample experience with partnership research and vested over 100+ hours to gather data and make it accessible to ICON voters.

Check out our roadmap on the “About” page to see how we plan to grow both ICON-DI (the ICON Decentralized Infrastructure) and P-Rep.Community.

We are excited to get the community’s thoughts and feedback :+1:

Check it out: https://p-rep.community/


A great tool! I can see that a ton of effort was put into it. Well done guys!

I would like to add a few suggestions if possible:

  1. First line freeze - so you dont have to scroll all the way up to see what a certain ‘yes’ is refering when you get to candidate #50. If its not too much work, the same at the ‘Proposal’ pages would be nice, so in case that you have several proposal windows open, when you click on the tab, you could see the logo of the P-reps that the page is refering to on top of the page
  2. A short description of the columns maybe…? I for example did not figure out what does ‘validatable partners’ stand for exactly
  3. If possible, a button next to the ‘Proposal’ one with the achievements/dApps/improvements etc that this particular candidate has achieved so far (that could be a lot of work though, so I dont know…). It could lead to another page in the same way that ‘Proposal’ does and provide detailed information about those
  4. If possible, a button next to the ‘Proposal’ one with the achievements/dApps/improvements etc that this particular candidate has openly planned for the future (that could also be a lot of work though, so I dont know…). It could lead to another page in the same way that ‘Proposal’ does and provide detailed information about those.
    These last two options could give investors opportunity to track the P-reps’ progress achievements and plans through the same tool, instead of just using it for info (although Im not sure what your plan is for the tool)

Im also wondering what does it mean when in example Team Identity is listed as ‘Unverifiable’ or the Team Background is listed as ‘No Background’ - does that mean literally that the team cannot be verified and that they dont have any significant background or that you were not able to obtain this information?


In regards to question N2 - I have found the description at the bottom, so I retract that.

Maybe it could be moved an a bit more visible place though (or as floating text, which would be great) as I have discovered it completely by accident by checking if there is a total of the amount of candidates added?


Thank-you nblaze for the feedback :+1:

1: Good idea and I’ll see if it’s possible with our current setup.

2: Glad you found the definitions. We’ll see about making it more easily accessible.

3: That may be a possibility in the future. We wanted to start with high level tool to help ICONist start researching P-Reps. We may be able to add more details from our research down the road. There may be a way to allow a contributor like yourself access for adding that kind of info to profiles. If this is something you would like to contribute, let me know and we’ll look into it :ok_hand:

4: P-Rep Community will transition from a voter’s tool to a P-Rep information hub after the vote. The plan is to aggregate info and track progress on action items. We are definitely on the same wavelength.

Our immediate focus is to wrap up the research on the remaining proposals, so every candidate is represented. Website changes can be considered after that has completed. Thanks again, and keep up the feedback :+1:


No worries - glad that I could help!

I usually do not like when P-reps go for tools like that as they do not have direct contribution towards the progress of the system, but I like this one because it is impartial, accurate and to the point. I believe that if you are able to transition it well after the election, it could actually be a very useful one-stop summary, useful to all investors (especially for the ones that have invested in 5-10 P-reps and would prefer not to follow that amount of different websites/information channels)

If you are planning to got that way, something that would also hit the nail on the head imo is if you are able to integrate real time stats about the P-reps’ productivity (some historic stats or a curve as well maybe?).

I can also see the hub progressing by adding info about dApps, Icon partners, Icon members, adding contacts etc etc - it has great potential if its done right (and if you are able to invest so much time and work of course)

Although I appreciate the offer and trust that I would be able to assist you with your platftorm and I would usually be happy to help, a task like that would require a lot of time invested in order to be done properly and honestly even now I think to myself every once in a while that I am way more involved than I should be, considering my current role and interests. There is just something with Icon that resonates with me and pulls me in…

I also think that because of the higher rapport between the P-reps, it should be easier for a P-rep representative to confirm any missing information as they will not rely only on the information that is shared online, but can easily get anything anything that is missing or harder to find by contacting the respective P-rep directly

Do you not think that sending a message to each P-rep periodically, asking them to approve their info would work? Each P-rep should be interested in being as accurately represented as possible, so they should be eager to not be left out as one of the few with outdated information

I can see how such option could make the summary less impartial or put you in difficult situations due to requests/demands from some P-reps though…