2% DAO Stimulus

Meteora aims to have a DAO comprised of the most diamond handed OGs, the best ecosystem experts, and the sharpest LPs.

The goal for this proposal is to bring the best people who believe in Meteora and to make this DAO the most effective DAO in crypto. This proposal should empower DAO experts towards making meaningful contributions towards the success of the Meteora DAO and reward them with an ownership stake in Meteora not payment.

Longterm Contributors

In order to identify contributors who share a longterm belief in Meteora , we are thinking that the MET token will be distributed to DAO fully locked for max duration. This will give contributors greater DAO voting power over time.

Vesting schedule

We are thinking of a distributing token quarterly: 2024 Q1: 1% , Q2: 0.5%, Q3: 0.25%, Q4: 0.25%. However this is subject to what allocations are decided.


The Meteora council should decide on how much token is allocated to each expert DAO contributor. Allocations will be determined retroactively based on past contributions for the quarter.

Community Review

The DAO/community will vote before every quarterly distribution on whether each contributor should receive their allocation, but, the council will have the final say on distribution. We believe this will ensure that contributions are meaningful in scope to reach the attention of the community.


Most contributors are involved in multiple projects and it’s important to hold space for great people to be able to step away and/or come back as needed. We think this can be an important attribute of the DAO to attract and harness the best people and would like to foster this value. With that in mind, we recognize that the most meaningful contributions end up being persistent at least over a period of time


The DAO will vote to allocate on the 2%, but, actual execution and distribution will be finalized by the DAO Council based on the guidelines in the proposal.


how will identify or select or elect such DAO contributors?


With an eventual TGE, it would be tempting to be shortsighted. So I love the max lock. It will incentivize long term thinking in the difficult decisions ahead.

Im wondering if people would be okay to reduce Q1 to 0.5% and have 0.125% per quarter in 2025 instead. Q1 and Q2 are the most important quarters, but I dont see Q1 being 2x more important than Q2 and 4x more important than Q3.


It’s an interesting idea but ideally this is supposed to incentivise long-term continuous contribution rather than quarterly focused actions.


Nice prospal. Nice plan. How can one participate


Come to our weekly community calls in discord and participate and contribute in our community discord is a good place to start

I’m open to other ideas. So far, I think this is working to a degree as a lot of people in the community have been regularly active, but, there’s definitely room for improvement.

1 Like

I’d recommend introducing a closed-door council with veto and voting power as a single member to the DAO ( a group that weighs as 1, think 1 union represents an entire group of people ). The idea here is to set operational standards and grow from there. Since initial team development can be chaotic when done without clear op and mindset guidelines, this council Seat would be comprised of the original founding members + core dev team + outside POV KOLs/visionaries ( think respectable figures with a deep understanding of Meteora’s mechanisms, love for the space, and who would love to bring value to, and have their name associated with Meteora )

1 Like

Would also like to highlight that there’s always an obvious segregation between participants and builders.

Loudest participants, may not have a lot to contribute. We’ve all been there, as you try to understand and have an interest, you’re more likely to be outspoken if you don’t understand, contributing to the conversation, but not actually have enough experience to contribute to the problem solving.

Builders are typically well informed already and may not contribute to asking all the questions, but likely best settled to contribute to the solutioning.

Healthy to have a mix of both types and anyone in between for something that is well functioning.

Max lock up is absolutely the best direction too


Interesting take. Wdyt of a max lockup + unlock bonuses on a contribution basis?

It will be interesting to see how this plays out, as there are some contributors who go above and beyond for Meteora to better the platform, and these people will of course be getting rewarded as such with ownership. I do hope that the people who show up everyday ready to contribute in smaller ways will not be overlooked.

Looking forward to helping and contributing to the MET DAO furthermore

1 Like

Where is the Link to the discord group

1 Like

I think max lock is a given. The early DAO contributors would need to bootstrap decision making for DAO, and this has to be aligned with long term thinking. I think it’s less so about paying those contributors as it is aligning them with this.

I don think having “bonus” make much sense given the allocation is decided retroactively based on contribution. This effectively already reward based on contribution.


Financial alignment is often the easier route, thus my question, but what would you consider a more optimal approach?


Maximum lock schedule would achieve this imo.


I’d recommend an approach similar to Superteam’s earn regarding specific, future tasks that require talented individuals to take an interest in Meteora’s growth. This would guarantee enough incentive for parallel growth.

1 Like

What kind of tasks do you think worked for them?

We should consider contacting the team behind Earn for a clear answer to your question since they have all of the data.

For Meteora, our initial task is to identify low-risk activities that can be converted into earn projects. The goal is to utilize the collective reach of both Meteora and the community members engaged in Earn’s tasks, transforming each task into an event ( add Zealy to the mix, and you’ve multiplied your reach exponentially ).

This approach aims to amplify engagement across various communities, significantly enhancing the efficiency and impact of each task in terms of output relative to cost, while simultaneously unlocking the potential of parallel building.

This was something we discussed in an earlier community call. In the end, we focused more for aligning folks who can help us bootstrap the MET DAO with some high value contributions. I don’t think we’re set up to pay people for tasks the DAO needs. But happy to discuss this approach.

1 Like