Delegate Reputation Score
The official link
DRS Calculation
Voting Participation Score – 40%
A combined metric that captures both how frequently a delegate votes and how engaged they are relative to the number of proposals they were eligible to vote on. It replaces and simplifies the separate “Number of Votes” and “Participation Rate” scores into a single, more intuitive component.
Note:
If a delegate has participated in fewer than 5 proposals (e.g., a newly delegated address), a UI message will be shown indicating that:
“This delegate is still new and currently on probation. Their voting history is not yet representative.”
Voting Impact Score – 10%
This score reflects how much voting weight a delegate brings on average when they participate.
Voting Timeliness Score – 15%
Rewards early, proactive voting using a linear time-decay model.
Rewards delegates for participating early in the decision process rather than waiting for outcomes to become obvious.
Rationale Submission Score – 15%
Measures how consistently delegates explain their voting decisions, with additional credit for timely reasoning.
Standard format:
Important Note:
To be counted, the rationale must be posted in the proposal’s official forum thread. Submissions in separate threads or other platforms will not be considered.
Forum Score – 20%
Captures delegate engagement in governance discussion spaces, including their visibility, activity, and consistency. All metrics are calculated over the last 21 days or the last governance cycles
Components:
Proposal Score
Proposals Initiated × 0.5
Proposals Discussed × 0.3
Avg. Likes on Proposals × 0.1
Engagement Score
Topics Created × 0.7
Posts Made × 0.4
Likes Received × 0.2
Activeness Score
Days Visited × 0.07
Time Read × 0.06
Each subcomponent score is calculated relative to all verified users by converting raw values into percentiles.
This ensures that performance is measured against community-wide participation norms, making the score more robust and less prone to being gamed by spam or low-effort activity.
Eligibility Requirement: To be included in Forum Score calculations, a user must meet at least Trust Level 1 on the forum.
Implementation Considerations
Retroactive Scoring Bootstrapping
To ensure fairness and avoid penalizing delegates for behaviors they were not informed about before the activation of DRS:
Simplified Transitional Score:
At DRS launch, a transitional score will apply retroactively based on the last 5 proposals.
Scoring Logic:
Each proposal = 20% weight.
A delegate receives 20% per proposal if they voted on it; 0% otherwise.
All vote types are valid (Against, For and Abstain)
Maximum retroactive DRS = 100% (voted on all 5), minimum = 0%.
Purpose:
This transitional score serves only as an initial DRS anchor. From the next proposal onward, the full formula will take effect.
Example:
On the first live proposal post-launch, DRS will be calculated as 80% retroactive score + 20% live DRS
On the second, 60% retro + 40% live
And so on, until after 5 proposals, the DRS will be fully derived from live behavior only.
This ensures a smooth transition without rewarding or penalizing behavior that occurred before DRS expectations were communicated.
How Transitional DRS Scores Are Computed
Two Score Components in Transition
Retroactive Score (based on Voting Participation only)
Calculated from the last 5 proposals before DRS launch.
If you voted on a proposal, you get 20 score per proposal.
Maximum possible = 100 score (voted on all 5).
Live Score (full DRS formula applies)
Once DRS is live, new proposals will be scored using:
Voting Participation Score (40%)
Voting Impact Score (10%)
Timeliness Score (15%)
Rational Submission Score (15%)
Forum Score (20%)
How Retro and Live Weights Combine Over Time
To smooth the transition, we use a blended weight system across the first 5 live proposals:
Proposal #
Retroactive Weight
Live DRS Weight
1st
80%
20%
2nd
60%
40%
3rd
40%
60%
4th
20%
80%
5th
0%
100%
Delegates who casted their first vote after DRS is live, their score is determined only by the live weight; no retroactive weight is applied.
How It Affects Component Weights
For each blended proposal, we recalculate the weights of each DRS metric based on the blend of:
Retroactive Voting Participation (100%)
Live full-score breakdown
This results in gradually shifting the weight from just voting participation to the full breakdown as shown in this summary table:
DRS Component
Retro Weight
Live Weight
Proposal 1 (80%/20%)
Proposal 2 (60%/40%)
Proposal 3 (40%/60%)
Proposal 4 (20%/80%)
Voting Participation
1
0.4
1(80%) + 0.4(20%) = 0.88
1(60%) + 0.4(40%) = 0.76
1(40%) + 0.4(60%) = 0.64
1(20%) + 0.4(80%) = 0.52
Voting Impact
0
0.1
0(80%) + 0.1(20%) = 0.02
0(60%) + 0.1(40%) = 0.04
0(40%) + 0.1(60%) = 0.06
0(20%) + 0.1(80%) = 0.08
Timeliness
0
0.15
0(80%) + 0.15(20%) = 0.03
0(60%) + 0.15(40%) = 0.06
0(40%) + 0.15(60%) = 0.09
0(20%) + 0.15(80%) = 0.12
Rational Submission
0
0.15
0(80%) + 0.15(20%) = 0.03
0(60%) + 0.15(40%) = 0.06
0(40%) + 0.15(60%) = 0.09
0(20%) + 0.15(80%) = 0.12
Forum Score
0
0.2
0(80%) + 0.2(20%) = 0.04
0(60%) + 0.2(40%) = 0.08
0(40%) + 0.2(60%) = 0.12
0(20%) + 0.2(80%) = 0.16
Total
1
1
1
1
1
1
Early Delegate Onboarding Logic
To avoid penalizing new delegates who haven’t had the opportunity to build a five-proposal track record:
Progressive Evaluation:
If a delegate has only 1 eligible proposal: that single proposal determines their initial DRS.
As more proposals pass, their DRS progressively shifts to a moving average over the last 5 proposals.
Example:
A delegate who votes and submits a rationale for their first proposal will score highly. If they later skip participation, their DRS will quickly drop below the 65% threshold.
UI Flags for Probationary Delegates
To communicate transparency to token holders:
Tally UI Request:
Delegates with fewer than 5 eligible proposals will receive a visual tag:
“This delegate is still new and currently on probation. Their voting history is not yet representative.”
This approach encourages exploration and rewards commitment while ensuring delegation decisions are better informed.
Oracle Update Cadence
To ensure consistency, fairness, and interpretability, Curia will push a full DRS update to the onchain oracle once per governance cycle, i.e. every 3 weeks.
While delegate actions (such as voting, rationale posting, or forum engagement) are tracked continuously, publishing the DRS in a batch manner at the end of each cycle ensures that scores are calculated based on complete and comparable data:
Voting Impact Score requires finalized vote tallies to normalize power.
Voting Timeliness for all participants at vote closure.
Rationale Submissions and forum activity are most meaningful when viewed in the full context of a proposal lifecycle.
This approach avoids mid-cycle volatility, reduces delegation churn, and provides token holders with a stable, interpretable benchmark of delegate behavior. The cadence aligns with the governance rhythm and offers clarity without sacrificing responsiveness.
Last updated