Governance
LREP governance controls protocol settings, upgrades, treasury routing, and optional identity policy.
What Governance Does
LREP is a capped reputation token with no protocol token sale and no treasury backing. Governance power comes from held, self-delegated LREP, and proposals execute through the governor and timelock. The current token auto-delegates voting power to the holder and rejects third-party LREP vote delegation.
- Upgrade or configure protocol contracts.
- Set round defaults and creator bounds.
- Route treasury spending, including ecosystem and partner activation grants.
- Configure optional identity credentials, calibration, and anti-abuse rules.
Proposal Lifecycle
| State | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Pending | Created and waiting for the voting delay. |
| Active | Voting is open: For, Against, or Abstain. |
| Queued | Passed and waiting in the timelock. |
| Executed | The change is live. |
Core Parameters
| Proposal threshold | 1,000 LREP hard floor |
| Proposal threshold range | 1,000-100,000 LREP |
| Voting delay | ~1 day |
| Voting period | ~1 week |
| Quorum | 4% of circulating supply (min 100,000 LREP) |
| Timelock delay | 2 days |
| Governance lock | 7 days after proposing or voting |
| Voting delegation | self-delegated LREP only |
Transferable LREP is an explicit launch choice, not an accidental cash-vote shortcut. Rating and payout influence are mitigated by prediction-accuracy scoring, effective-unit weighting, cluster controls, calibration and reveal reliability, while governance uses timelocks, voting locks, a quorum floor, and a proposal-threshold floor.
Round Settings Bounds
Question creators can choose round settings, but only inside governance-approved ranges. That lets urgent asks settle faster while broader questions can wait for more raters.
| Setting | Default | Creator bounds |
|---|---|---|
| Blind phase | 20 minutes | 5 minutes to 1 hour |
| Max duration | 7 days | 1 hour to 30 days |
| Settlement raters | 3 | 3 to 100 |
| Voter cap | 200 | 3 to 1,000 |
Treasury
The treasury starts with 32M LREP under governor/timelock control. Ongoing inflows include the treasury share of contested losing pools, withdrawal fees, and forfeited unrevealed reports. Spending follows the same proposal and timelock path as upgrades.
Treasury grants can support work that grows the RateLoop feedback network: partner activation, integrations, research and data projects, community growth, protocol development, verification acceleration, appeals, and security or whistleblower rewards. These uses are treasury responsibilities rather than Launch Distribution Pool rewards. Because LREP also carries governance power, grant proposals should explain the recipient, purpose, amount, expected impact, and any milestone or reporting expectations.
Safety Powers
Governance can use public on-chain evidence to respond to collusion, repeated unrevealed commitments, or other behavior that damages the feedback signal. The main enforcement tools are parameter changes, frontend stake slashing, calibration changes, optional credential policies, and treasury or pool routing through normal proposals.
These controls are implementation safeguards. The product goal stays narrower: make it easy for agents and apps to buy public open feedback and read the result.
Protocol Evolution
RateLoop is expected to evolve over time. The protocol operates in a fast-changing environment, especially as AI systems become more capable and as new smart-contract, wallet, identity, and coordination vulnerabilities are discovered. Governance was integrated from the start so the community can adapt protocol parameters, contracts, treasury routing, and safety rules without treating the first deployment as the final design forever.
In early protocol phases, some changes may be better handled through a transparent migration instead of an in-place upgrade. When that is necessary, the community can take a public snapshot of the current token allocation and redeploy updated contracts so balances, earned reputation, and protocol state can be carried forward while the implementation stays current. Any such migration should be documented, reviewable, and aligned with the same governance principles that control upgrades and configuration changes.