[Request for Feedback] Obol Governance Analytics & Delegate Scoring Parameter

[Curia]

Hi @Ariiellus @Jose_StableLab!

Thanks a ton for the thoughtful feedback! Below I’ve quoted each of your suggestions and shared how we’re thinking about them.

@Ariiellus

I’d suggest adding a section to highlight the most active delegates over the last 30 and 90 days, ranked exclusively by Forum Score. This could be especially valuable for new or upcoming delegates looking for role models or examples of impactful engagement.

• We’re already building exactly that. A rolling X-day leaderboard (based on Forum Score, or others attributes) is in the works and should be live some time next 1-2 weeks!

@Ariiellus

In my view, contributing to existing discussions adds more value to governance than just starting new threads. The depth and consistency of replies could better reflect meaningful engagement.

• We see the merit in emphasizing thoughtful replies, how much extra weight do you think replies should carry versus new-thread creation?

@Ariiellus

Also, what about increasing the influence of likes received specifically from other delegates? If that’s possible to filter, it could help reduce noise and avoid manipulation from casual users or bots.

• Great idea. To filter likes by source, we’d need either (a) having users to verify and link their delegate wallet to their forum profile (which we plan to create a thread for that) or (b) delegate accounts explicitly tagged in the forum (similar to Scroll’s setup), we can enable delegate-only like-weighting right away.

@Ariiellus

• I’d explore the idea of normalizing variables like User_Topic_Int and Prop_Initiated by the total number of topics or proposals created during the cycle. For example:

Engagement Score = (User_Topic_Int / Total_Topics * 7)  # Simplyfling 100*0.7
                 + (User_Post_Count * 0.5) 
                 + (User_Like_Rec * 0.3)

A similar logic could apply to Prop_Initiated and Prop_Discussed, making the score more reflective of relative contribution rather than just raw totals.

• Right now, we use the percentile method to normalize raw activity metrics (e.g., Prop_Initiated, User_Topic_Int, User_Day_Visited, etc.). Each metric is converted into a percentile score to ensure fair comparisons across users. Yes, we use the inclusive cumulative percentile method, meaning a delegate who ranks at the top in a given category will receive a score of 100.

@Jose_StableLab

In addtion, to anser your question about the 84-day window, we think this parameter is too restrictive and discourages new participation into the ecosystem, as a new delegate would need close to 3 months of flawless activity to reach their maximum score. We think 2 full voting cycles (~42 days) are a more reasonable timeframe to assess the commitment of new delegates until they reach their max score.

Thanks for reposting the detailed feedback on Tally’s delegate-compensation proposal. We’re on the same page about the original 84-day look-back being a bit long, three months of perfect attendance is a high bar for newcomers.

@coolhorsegirl

How it works:

• Each delegate’s voting frequency is calculated as a percentage of all proposals they were eligible to vote on within the rolling 63-day window.

In Tally’s latest revision the Delegate Reputation Score (DRS) look-back window has already been shortened to 63 days (three voting cycles). That change should make the system more responsive while still rewarding sustained participation.

Appreciate the constructive dialogue!