Staked Tech




a solution(s) to the current Delegated Proof of Contribution (DPoC) reward distribution mode


Feb. 23, 2020 ~ March 31, 2020





  • Details

    1. Introduction

    The current Stake and reward distribution model need to be revisited as it relates more to the traditional Proof of Stake (POS) or Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS) rather than the intended Delegated Proof of Contribution (DPoC) governance model. For the various reasons that will be addressed later in the paper, the Proof of Contribution is showing characteristics of a rather restrictive model where reward/return rates are favoring the “lazy” nodes.

    There is a positive initiative from the community to address the staking distribution problem. While there are some truly interesting approaches, we believe none of these solutions are strong enough to tackle a complex problem like this. One of the reasons lies in the fact that almost all isolated initiatives start and end in the telegram channels or forum talks. For the same reason, we propose that the problem is addressed in a more professional and a permanent form.

    In this proposal, we declare our intention to write a whitepaper that proposes a DeFiCON — a solution(s) to the current Delegated Proof of Contribution (DPoC) reward distribution model.


    2. Project initiation — Contribution proposal

    DeFiCON project plan is divided into six stages, starting with the initial Project idea phase where imperfections of the current DPoC model and all related sub-models were observed. The idea to propose a better and more decentralized solution for the ICON ecosystem was formed.

    The initiation phase primary goal is to transform the idea into the initiative with defined objectives. Research and understanding of the system imperfections are mandatory in order to develop a sustainable and stimulating solution for the problem.

    Contribution proposal with a detailed project plan, the scope of the required research and key performance indicators for proposal are vital parts of this phase.

    The objective of the contribution proposal is to get support from ICON Foundation through a community grant program to deliver the objectives from the proposal and transition the project from the Intention to the Project form. DeFiCON whitepaper will include detailed design of the solution and will be a vital document used for the further execution of the platform.

    In the following chapters, the basic description of whitepaper content and the scope of the research will be explained.


    deficon plan

    deficon plan1367×672 76.7 KB


    DeFiCON concept

    DeFiCON is a decentralized financial governance platform designed to improve the Proof of Contribution experience for the ICON Foundation, P-Reps, and the community. The platform early blueprint consists of:

    • functions for financial transparency, budget control, and project evaluations,
    • a community hub for collaboration and talent gathering, providing a toolkit for developing ideas into the professional proposals,
    • service for ICON Foundation to broadcast achievement and development goals. It will be a tracking system for project plan execution of community grant proposals,
    • management of the image, reputation, and history of the P-Reps,
    • integration of all the features to provide a measurable PoC indicator.

    A detailed model with a clear plan on how to integrate all participants and functions into the platform is the main objective of the whitepaper.

    2.2 P-Reps

    In-depth research required on the current ecosystem participants with the analysis on how to distinguish proactive from the ”lazy” nodes. Node categories need to be established in order to positively evaluate contribution/reward ratio (development, infrastructure, community, content creating,…) where node participation will be voluntary. Reward distribution model to be defined with the proposed incentive to stimulate the P-Reps to be more proactive with the reward system based on achieved PoC KPIs.

    2.3 Voters

    Probably the most dysfunctional part of DPoC model. The model of the vote distribution needs to be defined. Model baseline to be determined with the proposed incentives to decentralize the votes and implement a better PoC parameter that a common voter can refer to. Tool for monitoring and comparing the distribution line and baseline to measure incentive success rate to be proposed. The proposed incentive needs to stimulate public engagement, not penalize passive voters.

    2.4 Centralized initiative

    Our goal is to dramatically improve the governance experience by resolving problems and reducing friction in the governance process. We want to provide proposal owners with additional tools to present their offerings to the network in a more structured way to simplify the proposal evaluation process and reducing the workload involved in making well-informed decisions

    3. Conclusion

    As a P-Rep ranked 77th on the list with the monthly budget of less than 400$ we are a typical example of the struggle and probably the main restrictive factor of the wider P-Rep contribution to the network. All of our work so far was either voluntary or self-funded. We strongly believe a wider P-Rep audience needs to be stimulated to add additional value to the ICON project.

    We believe this proposal with the different funding approach should serve as an example for both ICON Foundation and Public Representative nodes. By approving this proposal, ICON Foundation will encourage ecosystem growth by promoting proactive initiatives. By accepting a different funding approach, ICON Foundation will have an opportunity to test a new and more conscious funding model that is further explained in the following paragraph.

    Public Representatives will get a positive stimulation to step out and try to develop the ideas in a controlled and financially more responsible way.

    Upon successful application and delivery of the DeFiCON whitepaper, we will approach other P-Reps and we look for a collaboration opportunity to deliver the product with the minimum spending.

  • Updates


    Download our DeFiCON 1 paper.

    ICON introduced the DPoC governance model to build an ecosystem that incentivizes Iconists to act honestly and build a decentralized community. As in every other governance model, the whole process is dynamic and it evolves as the network grows and matures. This paper describes the current state of the ecosystem and its governance. The additional focus is on the proposed adjustment to further reduce the inherited DPoS governance weak points.

    The detailed analysis of the existing IISS model and proposed improvement’s main goal is to display the stimulating and restrictive sides of each of the models for the wider audience. The 10-year projection of the reward distribution models is describing the expected development of the decentralized governance to the Iconists to bring the options on how we want the future governance to look like.

    The Contribution Proposal Fund is the most important part of the improvement proposal. It is a pillar of the decentralized development and the decentralized governance voting/election system. In recent weeks a few great initiatives started that will be a great addition of the Fund governance tools. ICONsolidation plans to stay involved in the governance process development and continue the work on further improvement of DPoC and CPF features.

    6. Key Performance Indicators

    As mentioned in the proposal, the following KPIs were defined and achieved:

    • Project delivered within budget - completed
    • Project delivered within the expected timeframe - before the deadline
    • Minimum one mid-project progress update 08/03/2020
    • Project delivered in a paper form with no less than 25 pages - additional review of the proposed IISS 3.0 changes added extra material
    • Start a community group for community discussion about the project and use its feedback to fine-tune the solutions - 08/03/2020 Ok, received through the communication with the community and the other P-Reps on social media (Telegram, Twitter, forum discussion,…)
    • *Track the effect of the new type of funding experiment on the P-Rep status - ***

    Transparency report

    Since the introduction proposal on 10th of February, our work was focused on:

    • researching the ICON papers and governance variables

    • researching the similar DPoS projects governance variables and their status

    • community approach and feedback reception

    • the overlook on the ecosystem participants

    • detailed analysis of the current IISS 2.0 model

    • work on the governance improvement proposal listed as IISS 2.5

    • catch up and analysis of the proposed IISS 3.0 changes

    • comparison of the models and their reward distribution

    • short, intermediate and the long term ( 10 years) projection for each of the models and their comparison

    The work on the paper took around 120 workhours and for the work, we received stimulation votes that gave us an additional reward of 9681 ICX (1,985 $) as of 25th March. Since the project was funded by the community votes, we decided not to spend any of the funds to finance the work. As written in our proposal, our long term commitment to the ICON is backed by our 2020 financial plan where entire server operation costs will be self-funded with no rewards sold to cover the costs. Instead of selling the DeFiCON funds, they are restaked to build up the treasury to secure long term node operation and upgrade costs.