Proposal for dApp Staking Code of Conduct

Governance Community Council
1

Hello Astar community,

Since the beginning of this year, a Community Council has been established, and this will be the first output of our activities.
It is well-known that since the release of dApp Staking, there have been many opinions, including both positives and challenges. This time, we started by clarifying the code of conduct. The Community Council proposes this.

Context

It has been several years since the dApp Staking system has been operational within the community. During this time, while many projects have utilized the system, several issues have been raised and discussed within the community. Among these, there are voices calling for changes to the dApp Staking system. In light of this situation, the community council has recognized the need for a solid and logical framework that leads the growth of the Astar ecosystem by first correctly understanding and organizing the basics.

Overview

One of the main responsibilities of the Community Council is the management of dApp Staking. As part of this effort, they started by clarifying the guidelines for dApp Staking. This allowed the Community Council to organize the code of conduct for projects participating in dApp Staking.

This proposal is being shared to gather feedback from within the community before it is published as an official document.

Considerations:

The Community Council understands that the items in this code of conduct do not completely resolve all the issues raised within the community so far. Additionally, there are some related items that still leave room for discussion. Therefore, based on opinions and feedback from the community, minor adjustments may be made before the official publication, but items deemed to require sufficient discussion will be maintained as ongoing issues.

Feedback Period:

Until February 14th

Community Council Original Members:

@Gaius_sama @jay @pitcoin777 @tksarah @Mouthmouth68 @AstarHood

dApp Staking Code of Conduct

This is the Code of Conduct for Astar’s dApp Staking. It is a set of rules and guidelines that all participants in dApp Staking should follow. This Code of Conduct aims to ensure that dApp Staking is fair, transparent, and efficient. However, nothing is set in stone, and it may be changed in the future.

# Guidelines
1 Users need to fully understand how dApp Staking works before using it. This can be done, for example, by reading official documentation or blogs.
2 dApp Staking is not a funding or charity mechanism. Projects must be self-sustaining regardless of staking rewards.

In this context, “self-sufficiency” means that while dApp Staking helps in launching and supporting the development of projects, it should not be the primary source of long-term revenue for the project. In other words, the project needs to be sustainable even without dApp Staking rewards. If additional funding is required, it must be sought from other sources.
3 dApp Staking is designed to support a sustainable ecosystem.

Projects should not promise financial gains to supporters through staking rewards without creating contributing contribution to Astar Growth with concrete results and onchain metrics.

Projects should use the dApp Staking mechanism to serve more users and add more value to the network.

The following on-chain metrics can contribute to asses induced the growth of Astar Network.

Examples for DeFi projects:

  • TVL (Total Value Locked)
  • Transaction volume (per unit time)
  • Generated fees (per unit time)
  • Wallets
  • Revenue
  • Mcap

Examples for NFT projects:

  • Floor price (in $)
  • Total volume on marketplace
  • Percentage of collection for sale
  • Number of holders
4 Projects should not use dApp Staking as a “business model".
5 dApp Staking is not a grant program. Therefore, when listing, there must be an existing and ongoing business. Specifically, at the time of listing for dApp Staking, there should already be a product or service(a live product or MVP) available. for users to utilize, as well as sufficient documentation to provid token holders with the necessary information to make a voting decision.

dApp Staking is a decentralized incentive mechanism which mean that, instead of a central authority distributing funds, token holders stake their tokens to support projects, which earn rewards based on that support. Grants program provide one-time or periodic funding, while dApp Staking offers ongoing rewards driven by community engagement. Projects must continuously attract support to sustain funding, making it performance-based rather than an upfront allocation.

On the other hand, the UCG (Unstoppable Community Grants) program is a funding initiative to boost early-stage dApps within the Astar ecosystem. It provides a staking-based grant of up to 17M ASTR from the Community Treasury over 4 months, with a possible one-time 4-month renewal. The program aligns with dApp Staking V3, using a tier system where, if a dApp in UCG reaches Tier 2, the grant is terminated.
For seed projects (project without MVP or live product) or grant programs, please refer to UCG.
6 All projects participating in dApp Staking are strongly encouraged to regularly report their ongoing contributions to the Astar Network ecosystem.

  • Reports should be submitted in the Astar Forum under the “Governance → dApp Staking Reports” subcategories.
  • While monthly reports are desirable, if this is difficult, please indicate the interval at which you can report and adhere to that schedule.
  • The content of the reports is left to the discretion of the project and does not need to be detailed; however, it should at least include the following:
    • Project progress
    • Roadmap
    • Activities and outcomes since the previous report
    • Quantitative results (as much as possible)
  • Especially for projects in Tier 4, regular reporting is important for ensuring that the community recognizes, understands, and supports their activities. Therefore, at least monthly reporting is desirable.
  • Reviews and feedback on the reports will be conducted by the community, with active involvement from Astar Ecosystem Agents in particular.
  • The community can issue warnings to projects that have not reported for three months (or three times according to the project’s specified schedule). If there is no response three months after the initial warning (or three times according to the project’s specified schedule), the council can propose delisting the project.
7 To determine whether something is negatively impacting the Astar ecosystem or not providing value, any community member can initiate a discussion on the Astar Forum.

If proofs that project behavior impact negatively the Astar Network and/or dApp staking programm, in reputation and/or financially, are uncovered, project will be issed a warning.

When a warning is issued in this fashion, the project will be given 60 days to take proper actions to resolve the issue and/or correct its behavior.

Following this periode, if the situation has not improved and the project can not provide reasonable explanation of why, the council will initiat a delisting proposal.

If the project is delisted in such fashion, it can apply to be listed again, but it must clearly demonstrate that the previously unaddressed issues have been resolved.

Examples of inappropriate behavior and actions that negatively impact the Astar ecosystem:
  • Lack of transparency with the community
  • Failure to meet the deadlines specified in the guidelines or by the Council/Community
  • Insufficient engagement on social media and absence of updates
  • Restrictive communication confined to the dApp’s community (e.g., Discord) instead of being open to the entire Astar community on the Forum
  • Migration to another ecosystem that does not benefit Astar
  • Misuse of dApp staking resources to fund projects outside the Astar ecosystem
  • Exploiting the community (TGE, Liquidity, NFTs, etc.)
8 Clearly specify the main category of the dApp (such as NFT, DeFi, Tool, Utility, etc.).

The current main categories are as follows:

  • DeFi (Including LST, Lending, DEX, GameFi, )
  • NFT (Including Digital Art, Collectibles, Music and Concert Tickets, Digital Identity and Certificates, RWA,)
  • Tooling (Including Infrastructure, Bridge, Oracle, )
  • Utility (Including Wallets, )
  • SocialFi
  • AI (Including “AI Agent”, DeFAI, )
  • IoT
  • DAO
  • DePin
  • Stablecoin
  • Entertainment (Includinf Game, Metaverse, P2E, )

To make it easy to identify the type of dApp, please avoid using the “other” category. If a new category is needed, you can propose it on the Astar Forum and start an additional discussi on.
9 dApp Staking is not a program of legitimization.

While a screening is performed by the council and the community priore to listing, being listed on dApp Staking itself does not imply blind official trust. Project must constantly earn and foster this trust through consistant work and report to community.
10 The listing of dApps for dApp Staking can be determined through the following methods:

Community Council:
Projects apply for listing on dApp Staking through the Astar Forum. The Community Council will review and make a decision within approximately two weeks after the project’s application.

Token Holders:
After the decision by the Community Council, projects must create an on-chain proposal on Subsquare to register their dApp. This proposal will be upgraded to a referendum and voted on by token holders. If approved, it will be executed on-chain.
7 Likes
2

Thank you for creating these guidelines!
I think it is great that you mention again the definition of dApp Staking as it is a guideline not only for developers but also for stakers.

1. Reporting Obligations

I generally agree with the content, but with regard to the reporting obligation in #6, I think 2 months (twice) before issuing a warning is sufficient. Two months (twice) before the warning plus two months (twice) after the warning would be four months (four times), which I think is long enough.
Also, the cycle is for when monthly reporting is difficult, but it might be a good idea to determine a maximum period of time as well. For example, even for infrastructure projects where progress is not likely to occur, I think you should report at least once a quarter. So, why not set the reporting cycle at a maximum of three months?
However, if the maximum is 3 months, it would be harmful in this respect because a very long period of time would be set depending on the warning and the subsequent period set.

2. Regarding the publication

I don’t know how you envision the guidelines being published, but I think it would be easier to understand if the ten items in this issue were titled.

3. Revaluation

How would you handle dApps that are currently listed?
I think a full re-evaluation is in order.

1 Like
3

You’re right, sir, for projects that don’t contribute to the ASTR ecosystem, they’re like bloodsuckers.
As far as I know of some projects, some have almost stopped developing, but they are still on the dApp staking list, enjoying the staking benefits, they get a portion of the rewards for the staked tokens, and sell them.

I’m glad admins are aware of this issue and are gradually improving, hopefully ASTR is getting better and better.

1 Like
4

Hi @tksarah I agree with many things.
In any case, it should be established how to discuss all this, in the sense of whether it should be a discussion disconnected from the one regarding the reformulation of dapp staking or not. I think that dividing things only creates confusion.

In any case, even if I agree with many points, many other points are not valid for us.
Number 4 for example is a point that tries to take all the weight of the current failure off the shoulders of those who built the model. And let me explain better.
Dapp staking that is not technically a grant is true. But it always depends on the type of dapp and the economic objectives set.
For example, at the time, with AoC we could deliver our entire development simply by taking the rewards that were due to us. The fact that dappstaking was sufficient and the basis of the project’s development, was not and would not be a negative thing, if there were clear and serious rules, indeed in the case of multiple projects that arrived at a final product simply with what for some were simple tips, it could be a great boast for the ecosystem. Taking attention away from the failure of the model by making it become a simple partial support in the eyes of developers, is not an advantage for astar, it is only an advantage to excuse the current state of things. I don’t know if I explained myself. If a dapp manages to develop the entire project with dappstaking, it is only a positive thing for ASTAR.

IF OUT OF THE HUNDREDS OF DAPPS LISTED IN THE LAST TWO YEARS, THERE HAVE BEEN DISAPPOINTING DEVELOPMENTS, IT IS BECAUSE THE DEVELOPERS HAVE NOT WORKED SERIOUSLY.

The code of conduct should be entirely based on milestones. Milestones must unlock earning periods.
1)The dapp develops and reaches milestones
2) if achieved, enablement to earn for a period in build & earn
3) in the same period, the new milestone reached can be presented and the cycle repeated

Dapp staking v3 must be eliminated. all listed dapps must be immediately checked.

Fixed number of supported dapps could be a fair model.
It is not written anywhere that there must be 200 dapps and that they are then left without control in many cases and without support in many other cases. It seems to me that he used this number for marketing, to show that all the developers of dotsama had entered the first parachain to develop magnificent things. This thing has not paid off today.

The core team has made dappstaking something secondary to the development narrative on astar, freeing up time and resources. The v3 is the classic barrier that tries to cut costs, but at the same time keeps the portal pages full, with many logos of many projects.
A huge mistake, dapp staking must be a qualitative project, based on real development, controlled and rightly remunerative for those who work well. The possible idea of ​​quantifying support as help and not the basis of the project is what will bring less quality to the new dappstaking and projects of low value.

You can’t go from cases in which dapps have earned thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars in recent years without delivering anything to a simple tip for those who then want to really get involved.
Lowering the standards of support just because in the past there hasn’t been a high standard of control is the stupidest option that the community can choose.

I’m not saying always, but every now and then listen to the voice of those who have a real interest in developing and have already demonstrated something, even if not on astar.

Let’s stop with the victim mentality and with everyone against everyone. Let’s coordinate a new system, something worth investing funds for, and let the community decide this.

Dapp staking MUST be linked to the government vote. Stakers must get involved. We need to work hard on that, not on the definition of grant/support!

For the rest, we attach here our idea already expressed in the other post, unfortunately it is difficult to talk about some points you expressed without writing about others.

5

Thank you for your prompt feedback. As it includes better suggestions that can be quickly updated, we will review it in the council.

4 Likes
6

Thank you @tksarah ! I like this code of conduct that establishes a solid framework to ensure fairness, transparency, and long-term sustainability for projects within the Astar ecosystem, one minor suggestion is that we should also consider the user education part for the dApp staking, maybe a category for dApp staking would be web3 education that can help users understand the dApp staking, guides on staking ,project evaluation, and participate the governance and discusson on Astar forum?

2 Likes
7

Hello @DrCAO ,

Thank you for your feedback.

I think the perspective of “education” could be valuable. However, I am struggling with how to appropriately include and publish this in the Code of Conduct. You provided an example of a category, but could you please elaborate on the specific actions or ethical standards that you envision for projects and members involved in dApp Staking in the context of a Code of Conduct? I would like to use this for reference.

8

Hi @tksarah , we don’t have to include the “education” part in the code of conduct, the “education” may be one of the categories for dApp staking, or one part of the current dApp staking, like a DeFi project could share the tutorial of using their product when reporting their ongoing contribution.

1 Like
9

I see, I had a slight misunderstanding. Thank you for the clarification. “Education on dApp Staking,” I understand your point. The council has other high-priority topics, so this might be of lower priority. However, I am aware that some content has already been prepared individually, and I have also prepared some myself.
As someone who teaches at educational institutions in my professional work, I am very interested in this topic and would personally like to promote it.

2 Likes
10

This is amazing, thank you! I have been trying to make more educational content, and I will learn from you in the future!

2 Likes
11

Dear Community,

Thank you for your cooperation.
Here are the next actions:

  • We will add “classification” to the CoC guidelines to make the table easier to understand.
  • We will update the official Astar documentation.
  • We will announce a separate survey to check the status of existing projects in light of these guidelines.

Thank you for your attention.

3 Likes
12

The idea of the survey seems to me to be a very good idea, to know the perception of the projects with respect to these guidelines is a great way of coolaboration between Astar and its projects.

1 Like
13

Thank You for the updates :grinning:

2 Likes