Collective Rewards for Builders

[forum]

Collective Rewards for Builders

RootstockCollective’s mission is to bring Bitcoin to the next billion, empowering builders on Bitcoin to thrive in a decentralized ecosystem, where innovation is championed and rewarded.

Aiming to address the value capture challenge faced by builders, the Collective Rewards program provides a new, exciting opportunity for rewarding builders innovating on Rootstock. Fostering a decentralized and transparent way to reward engagement and participation, it allows builders to capture a share of the community-led treasury, incentivising high-quality projects.

The first version of the Collective Rewards will be made available on 29th October in the RC V2.0 release (as mentioned in the recent Roadmap proposal) and community-approved Builders will be able to sign up and receive an equal share of the Collective Rewards treasury. In the future, builders will be able to earn an additional share of the DAO’s revenues and share them with the community members who voted for them - the Backers.

The collaborative nature of the program will encourage continuous interaction and engagement with the wider community to ensure high-quality projects will be championed and rewarded accordingly. In return, Builders could share part of their rewards with their backers, recognizing and incentivizing their commitment to the project. This collaborative model will nurture a thriving ecosystem where all members contribute to shared growth, leading to a success of the overall ecosystem.

Builders interested in submitting proposals and building a thriving Bitcoin ecosystem can refer to the Step-by-Step guide here.

Collective Rewards are coming. Sign up, Join the Club, Get Activated!

[tamlerner]

Update - May 2026: Revised Guidelines & New Proposal Template

Hi everyone,

Since the original post in October 2024, the Collective Rewards program has grown significantly - we now have over 30 active builders, more than $675k in rewards distributed, and a much clearer picture of what makes a strong builder application.

With that experience, we’ve updated the guidelines and introduced a new standardized proposal template for builder activations.

---

What’s changed

The rewards mechanism is the same - bi-weekly cycles, community-backed, builders set their own Backer Reward %. That hasn’t changed.

What we’ve improved:

• New proposal template below - builders now introduce themselves with a structured format that includes team info, onchain metrics, a short intro video, and a declared Backer Reward % upfront. This gives delegates and backers the full picture before voting.
• Clearer metrics expectations - we now ask builders to link directly to their Blockscout contract pages and share verifiable onchain data (active wallets, transactions, TVL, volume).
• Video introduction required - a short YouTube or Loom video from the founding team, so the community can put a face to the project before voting.
• Pre-submission checklist - KYB approval, live contract addresses, and team identification must all be confirmed before a proposal goes to vote.

---

New proposal template

[YYMM Builder Activation] ProjectName

TL;DR: One sentence on what you build and why Rootstock.

---

Who We Are

Project: ProjectName
Website: https://yourproject.xyz
Category: DeFi / DEX / Wallet / Infrastructure / (pick one)
Network: Rootstock (RSK) Mainnet
Smart Contract Address(es):

• 0x... - ContractName
• 0x... - ContractName

---

Introduction Video

A short video (2-5 min) from the founding team introducing the project and why you’re applying.

Paste a YouTube or Loom link if the embed doesn’t work:
https://www.youtube.com/@RootstockCollective

---

The Team

Name	Role	Background	Contact
Firstname Lastname	Co-Founder & CEO	Brief background, e.g. “ex-Uniswap, 8 yrs in DeFi”	@handle
Firstname Lastname	Co-Founder & CTO	Brief background	@handle

Add or remove rows as needed.

---

What We Build

In one paragraph: Describe your product clearly. What problem does it solve? Who uses it? Why does it exist on Rootstock specifically?

Key features:

• Feature 1
• Feature 2
• Feature 3

---

Our Rootstock Numbers

These are the metrics that matter most to the community when deciding whether to back you. Be honest - backers will verify onchain.

Metric	Current Value	Source
Monthly Active Wallets	X,XXX	Blockscout
Monthly Transactions	XX,XXX	Blockscout
Total Value Locked (TVL)	$X,XXX,XXX	DeFiLlama / own data
Monthly Volume	$X,XXX,XXX	Own data
Time Live on Rootstock	X months	-
New Wallets (last 30d)	X,XXX	Blockscout

Link to your Blockscout contract page(s): Rootstock address details for 0x | Blockscout…

---

Value We Bring to the Ecosystem

Explain what your product contributes beyond the numbers above. This is your case for why the community should back you.

• New users to Rootstock: How are you bringing people to the chain?
• Liquidity / TVL contribution: What capital does your product attract or retain?
• Developer / builder value: Are you building infrastructure others depend on?
• Community / awareness: Are you growing Rootstock’s presence externally?

---

Backer Reward %

We propose to set our initial Backer Reward % at X%.

Explain briefly why you chose this percentage and what it signals about your commitment to the community.

---

Links & Resources

Website	https://yourproject.xyz
dApp	https://app.yourproject.xyz
Docs	https://docs.yourproject.xyz
GitHub	yourproject · GitHub
Twitter / X	https://twitter.com/yourproject
Telegram	https://t.me/yourproject
Discord	Discord
Audit(s)	Link to security audit if available

---

Checklist

Before voting opens, confirm the following:

• KYB submitted and approved
• Smart contract address(es) listed above are live on Rootstock Mainnet
• Video introduction posted above
• Team members identified with public profiles
• Onchain metrics verifiable via Blockscout
• Backer Reward % declared

---

And thats it! So… What stays the same?

• Anyone building a live product on Rootstock can apply
• The community votes - no central approval
• KYB is required before submitting
• Minimum 1,000 stRIF to submit the onchain proposal
• Backers keep full ownership of their stRIF and earn a share of builder rewards

---

If you have questions about the new template or the application process, drop them below or reach out on Telegram.

Collective Rewards are still here.
Still growing… now easier to navigate.

Rootstock Collective team

KYB Form	docs.google.com/forms/d/187Cr1…
KYC / KYB Questions	compliance@rootstockcollective.xyz
On-Chain Proposals	app.rootstockcollective.xyz/proposals

| Twitter / X| @RootstockColl|

[Axia]

In general I think these are positive changes.

The standardized template should make the process much easier for delegates/backers to evaluate consistently, especially as the program grows. The biggest improvement to me is the emphasis on verifiable onchain metrics and direct Blockscout links. That moves applications away from “trust us, we’re building” and toward something the community can actually inspect.

I also like the intro video requirement. It adds a lightweight human layer without making the process overly bureaucratic, and it should help the community understand who is behind each project.

More broadly, I think this is directionally aligned with where the Collective is heading: more rigor, clearer expectations, and an increased emphasis on data and verifiability. That feels healthy. As more rewards are distributed, the bar for transparency and evidence should probably rise with it.

Overall, this feels like a good evolution of the Collective Rewards process: clearer for builders, easier for backers, and more grounded for delegates. Looking forward to seeing how the new format works in practice!

[DAOstar_gov]

Thank you, @tamlerner for this fantastic revised version of the proposal template! We are definately moving away from a “trust us” narrative and towards verifiable, structured data is exactly how the Collective matures and scales responsibly. We also agree with @Axia comments about the inclusion of a mandatory video and a rigid pre-submission checklist introduces an excellent layer of professional friction to filter out low-effort applications.

To ensure this new framework drives maximum value for delegates and backers, we’d like to offer a few operational suggestions to tighten the metrics section:

1. Hardening “Self-Reported” vs. Onchain Metrics

The template currently allows “Own data” for Monthly Volume and TVL. Self-reported data introduces a vector for variance and makes “apples-to-apples” comparisons difficult for delegates.

• Suggestion: Could the Rootstock team collaborate with Blockscout or creating a Dune dasboard to establish a standardized query for these two metrics? With a standardized, public Dune dashboard or a verified Blockscout query framework for volume and TVL, rather than allowing their “own data” to be a primary source. This ensures all builders are evaluated on a level playing field.

2. Measuring Stickiness over Snapshot Growth

The template does a great job of capturing top-of-funnel traction (New Wallets, Monthly Transactions). However, a project can easily manufacture a short-term spike to look favorable right before an application and it misses user retention. A project could spend heavily on a short-term marketing campaign to pump “New Wallets” for the 30-day snapshot just to pass the vote.

• Suggestion: We recommend adding a simple metric for Wallet Retention (e.g., Percentage of Active Wallets that are returning vs. new) - a “retention/stickiness ration”. This gives delegates an immediate look at product-market fit and ensures we are bootstrapping sticky utility, to ensure the Collective is rewarding sustainable growth rather than transient, incentivized sybil activity.

Thks for this great work to move the Collective forward!

[Axia]

+1 to creating a Dune dashboard that establishes a standardized query for Monthly Volume and TVL metrics.

[tamlerner]

Amazing comments and proposals from both of you, we will be reviewing and working with the team on them @DAOstar_gov @Axia .

onwards!