Instead of suspending voting, which can result in dilution of ASR by non-active stakers, we should use a lightweight, on-chain check-in system that rewards active engagement without requiring divisive votes until DAO 2.0 launches.
How It Works:
Quarterly Structure:
Each quarter is divided into four check-in windows, roughly one per 3 weeks.
Check-In Mechanism:
During each check-in window, a staker must sign a simple transaction (no vote or opinion required) to prove active presence and engagement.
Check-in announcements will be made in advance.
Each window stays open for 4 days.
Signing the check-in costs negligible gas and records a timestamp on-chain.
ASR Calculation:
The amount of ASR earned that quarter is proportional to the number of check-ins completed.
4 check-ins = 100% of that quarter’s ASR
3 check-ins = 75%, and so on.
No Opinions Required:
This system avoids voting fatigue and drama while still rewarding active, present participants.
Benefits:
Reduces FUD by eliminating polarizing votes
Encourages consistent engagement from stakers
Keeps rewards merit-based, not just passively earned
Maintains on-chain accountability and transparency
Lightweight UX with minimal friction
Conclusion
This proposed check-in system is a middle path: it replaces contentious votes with a neutral activity that still proves participation. It gives stakers something to do without forcing them to take sides, and it keeps ASR distribution tied to verifiable on-chain behavior.
I fully support this and this accomplishes the core ask that my other proposal ( DAO pause and the new ASR structure) does, without the need for mock/fun votes.
The more that can be done to maintain the current ASR whilst proceedings are paused the less likely this quieter governance period will impact token price/holders. Supporting.
This mechanism or something similar is absolutely necessary.
If there isn’t some mechanism for the team wallets to “opt-out”, then that means that a large portion of the ASR tokens will go to them, even though they had agreed not to participate in voting to avoid that scenario.
Please reference the two threads on this topic here:
This is a great idea, at least if votes can’t determine active wallet for rewarding users and as the name of the program implies, active staking rewards. Let introduce active actions to curb non active dilution.
suppose If 100 million tokens are staked in inactive or possibly dead wallets that do not participate in governance, those wallets will still passively accumulate staking rewards (ASR). However, they must manually claim those rewards for them to be added to their staked position. the rewards will remain unclaimed indefinitely.
well if someone says those unclaimed could have let some dedicated staker increase his position, but did u advocated for the same when teams were voting ?
It should be based on whoever voted in the most recent JUP and JUICE vote, those who stake new JUP, and those who opt in. It seems silly to force those who voted in the most recent JUP and JUICE vote to do meaningless pulse checks (especially for those of us with multiple stake wallets, for which no consolidation tool has been provided…).
