Tackling Free Riding & Participation Quality

Objective:

Define what "quality participation" means for delegators and orchestrators, how it's measured, and how emissions/treasury incentives can be tuned to reward it.

Problem Statement: Today emissions reward participation without distinguishing quality. Passive stake, dormant delegators, and underperforming orchestrators all receive the same rewards as active, high-value participants. This is a tax on everyone else.

Scope

Phase 1 — Define

• What is "active" vs. "passive" participation for delegators?

• What is "quality" for orchestrators? (uptime, performance, pricing, adoption of best practices?)

• How is each measured on-chain vs. off-chain?

• What are the known limitations and edge cases?

Phase 2 — Design

• What mechanisms exist to reward quality? (protocol changes, treasury programs, reputation systems)

• What are the tradeoffs of each approach?

• How do we handle "vampire nodes," dormant stake, and inactive orchestrators?

Phase 3 — Propose

• Draft recommendations for community discussion

• Identify what requires a LIP vs. a treasury program vs. social norms

Key Questions to Answer

• Can quality be measured purely on-chain, or do we need off-chain signals?

• Is this a protocol change or can it be addressed through treasury incentive programs first?

• Who defines the quality criteria — Foundation, community, or a working group?

Out of Scope: Changing overall inflation rate (covered by other emissions LIP’s)

Success Criteria: Community-agreed definition of active participation and quality participation + at least one concrete mechanism proposed for implementation in H2 2026