We’re supportive of VCP Cycle 2 and like the direction of distinguishing between traditional delegates and extraordinary contributors. The addition of Contributor Points feels like a natural evolution, since research, integrations, content, and analytics can create real impact for Velora and deserve recognition.
At the same time, we think it could help to keep some continuity with Cycle 1. The structure worked well, stayed under budget, and gave everyone clear expectations. Keeping the tier compensation levels steady, at least for this round, would let us keep that momentum. Contributor Points could then act as a bonus layer rather than a full redesign from day one.
A pilot phase for CP in the first half of the program might be a good way to test it out. We could run it as a bonus or multiplier, then do a mid-term review to see how it plays in practice before locking it in. That would give the DAO time to gather feedback and build shared confidence in the system.
Transparency will also be important. Publishing short monthly notes on why certain contributions earned their CP scores could help set benchmarks and avoid confusion. Over time, that would build precedent and give everyone a clearer sense of what “good” looks like.
Finally, while the 30-day vesting feels reasonable, it might be worth exploring a hybrid approach that keeps some rewards liquid and some locked. That way we balance long-term alignment with the fact that delegates also have real costs to cover.
Overall, we support the renewal of this program and the direction it’s headed. With a few small adjustments around continuity, inclusivity, and transparency, VCP Cycle 2 can push Velora governance to an even higher level.