If Sherlock were to increase judging pay... #2
Replies: 2 comments 2 replies
-
|
Hey there friends, 0xnevi here, currently the 4th ranking watson on the judging leaderboard, my vote on this is supporting the increase in lead judge pay but with the caveat that Lead judge can no longer share the Judging Pool with other watsons judging. Depending on how much is the increase in lead judge pay, it could be a split between lead judge and judging pool, so as to not skew the incentives too much in the lead judge favor. After all, judging pool has an average of 70-100 participants, while lead judge is only 1 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Hey 0xnevi, appreciate the feedback @nevillehuang. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Definitely more on lead judge. My vote is on either keeping the 50/50 ratio or skewing it 60/40 (or even more) in favor of the lead judge, current payout rules. However, contest pot should not be decreased in any case. Every increase in the contest pot is, very often, an increase in the lead judge's pay as well, so for the lead judge it's a two-way increase in the absolute payout value. Therefore the lead judge's pay is actually increased by more than one would think. On the other hand, we can all agree the lead judge's work is very hard since their work extends way beyond judging:
The last two are arguably the biggest responsibilities. Even the LSW does not have that responsibility, strictly speaking. As a non-lead judge, I don't think I'm at any disadvantage regarding payouts here, since when the lead judges are busy reviewing issues and resolving escalations post-judge-contest, I can do other judging contests and increase my payouts. The lead judge is also at a disadvantage of having their payouts slashed due to contest delays, which may even come from external factors out of anyone's control to begin with. Therefore I think lead judge's fixed payout should be increased by more, especially for smaller contests due to the potential workload/payout imbalance. I do not think decreasing the contest pot for said purpose is a good idea, since it has an adverse effect of disincentivizing the community. However do feel free to prove me wrong on this front, could be through what is the value of the judging contest itself. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Thank you for the thorough explanation of your viewpoints, @midori-fuse. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Engaging the community through Governance Votes and participation in our Forum Discussions gives you a direct way to contribute to Sherlock and help make crypto a safer place. 🗳️
Sherlock is excited to involve the community as we continue to ship new features. 🚀
Providing feedback and voting are only the first steps of participating in Sherlock’s decision making and we look forward to increasing the opportunities to contribute to Sherlock with the long-term goal of total decentralization. 🫡
The first question:
➡️ If Sherlock were to increase judging pay, should more go to the judging pot or to the Lead Judge?
🔜 Snapshot vote to follow.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions