In many crypto projects, the largest holders end up being just the people who were aware of the project earliest. But those early adopters are not necessarily the most valuable to the future of the ecosystem. So it is essential to maintain incentives for ongoing contributions and engagement. One natural way to achieve this in a two-token framework ... See more

To create a form of liquid value attached to reputation, coins should accrue to point holders through a series of dividends, where each point holder is awarded coins based on the number of points they have.

Reputation tokens on digital platforms typically serve two purposes:

Reputation tokens on digital platforms typically serve two purposes:

Drawing on our knowledge of economic theory and game design, we argue for a reputation system design based on a pair of tokens—one for signaling reputation and the other for offering liquidity—which could serve as tangible representations of meaningful contributions.

-To identify and reward the users who have contributed value to the platform—a form of signaling, which those users can parlay into public reputation.

So what if we instead separate transferability from the token itself? That’s why many games already split scores or points and coins or currency; it’s easy to imagine how spending your “score” could really backfire.

Yet these two roles are in opposition to each other. A token needs to be exchangeable in order to be liquid. But the more liquid a token is, the less effective it can be as a pure signal of reputation. 

That said, the platform may not have a clear sense of the contributions’ value, especially early on, so there needs to be a mechanism for experimentation and recalibration around token distribution.