Hello everyone, Iām dropping in to leave some feedback on delegate compensation after digesting Messariās Q4 Rootstock Report.
I want connect the report back to governance.
Specifically: what more can delegates do to support and accelerate the initiatives Rootstock Labs is already advancing?
Right now, delegates are primarily responsible for reviewing builder grant applications. Thatās valuable work and helps move the ecosystem forward. But as the Collective matures and the market and the BTCFi landscape evolves and continues to change rapidly, it likely makes sense to activate and incentivize delegates to contribute into other high-leverage areas that drive measurable ecosystem growth.
For example, in a recent forum discussion, I asked @Francisco what support delegates could provide to Infrastructure Ventures. His answer was clear: liquidity introductions.
That aligns directly with Messariās Q4 report: liquidity on Rootstock is still concentrated in a small number of protocols.
Other governance-relevant takeaways from the report:
ā¢ Institutional narrative is strengthening, but converting that into durable onchain growth remains the core challenge
ā¢ Revenue pressure remains
ā¢ Infrastructure and security execution improved
ā¢ User activity and liquidity softened QoQ
Iām proposing we create an additional pathway for delegate contribution, where delegates are incentivized not only to review grants, but also to initiate strategic work in Rootstockās highest-impact areas. For this to be effective, these efforts should be tightly aligned with RootstockLabs either directly or indirectly through designated liaisons such as @tamlerner @eleanor @sascha.collective and/or the Anode team @Kaf_Anode @Raphael_Anode, so we avoid duplicating work and focus delegate capacity on high-value initiatives. RootstockLabs has the deepest visibility into ecosystem priorities and is already driving many of the key initiatives underway so they can help assess what work they need support on or what work they donāt have bandwidth for and delegates can lead and/or support.
One practical example: the TABConf discussion surfaced a broader issue ā the Collective has had conversations around conferences and hackathons before, but without a clear strategy, the conversation didnāt progress beyond early-stage discussion.
In short, delegates should not become complacent, and the DAO risks stagnation if grant review remains the only incentivized contribution.
I hope this perspective resonates and helps spark a constructive discussion.