Axynom
  • Introduction
    • What is Axynom?
    • Vision & Mission
  • Why Now
  • Founder's Note
  • The Problem
    • Centralized growth traps
  • Token reward inflation and failure
  • Lack of contributor alignment
  • Gatekeeping in Web3
  • Axynom Solution Overview
    • Proof of Growth (PoG)
    • Contributor as a Stakeholder
    • Transparent Rewards and Governance
  • Modular Ecosystem Architecture
  • PoG: Proof of Growth System
    • What is PoG
    • How Contributions Work
    • Voting and Governance Flow
  • GP: Growth Points
  • Role of Admins, Moderators, and Community
  • Examples of Valid Contributions
  • Axynom Token (AXY)
    • Token Utility
    • Tokenomics
  • Transfer Tax Logic
  • Governance Eligibility
  • Vesting and Distribution
  • Staking Mechanics
    • Lock Periods and APY
    • Early Exit Penalties
    • Sustainability Model
  • Treasury and Ecosystem Pools
    • Overview of Pools
    • Role of the Treasury
    • POL Strategy (Protocol-Owned Liquidity)
  • CaaS (Contributions-as-a-Service)
    • What is CaaS
    • Exporting the PoG System
    • Integration Possibilities
    • Revenue Model for Axynom
  • Governance & Voting
    • Governance Phases
    • Voting Power (AXY + GP)
    • Quorum & Approval Logic
    • No ‘Adjust GP’ Rule
  • Gas Economics
    • Why Arbitrum One
    • Axynom L3 Chain with AXY as Gas
  • Product Roadmap
    • Phase 1: MVP Launch (Staking, PoG, Treasury)
    • Phase 2: CaaS, L3 Chain, Scaled Contributor Base
    • Key Milestones
    • TGE Timeline (After Product-Market Fit)
  • Security & Audits
    • Upgradability Practices
    • Modular Contract Architecture
    • Audit Strategy Post-TGE
    • Role of Community Peer Review
  • KPI Forecast & Growth Goals
    • Contributors, GP Points, Stakers, TVL
    • Expected PoG Submissions
    • Treasury Size & Rewards Flow
    • Marketing & KOL Activation Plans
  • Conclusion
    • Axynom Is Not a Product. It’s a Protocol.
    • Call to Builders, Shillers, Designers, Thinkers
    • How to Get Involved
Powered by GitBook
On this page

Lack of contributor alignment

In most protocols, contributors are optional. They’re treated as supporters, not stakeholders. Even when their work is valuable, there is no structure to track it, reward it, or connect it to the future of the project.

This creates a misalignment.

The people who help a protocol grow are often:

  • unpaid

  • unnoticed

  • replaceable

Meanwhile, decision-making and token supply remain concentrated in the hands of the original team or early investors.


What misalignment looks like

Contributor Action
Protocol Response

Writes a detailed thread

No visibility, no reward

Designs a landing page

No attribution, no payment

Translates documents

Considered helpful but not essential

Brings new users

No credit, no long-term recognition


When contributors are not part of the core loop, growth becomes fragile. They stop participating. Or worse, they move to other projects where their work is valued.

A protocol cannot grow through a few team members alone. It needs a system that lets anyone contribute, and a structure that ensures the right people get credit, reputation, and rewards.

Without this, most communities stay passive.

PreviousToken reward inflation and failureNextGatekeeping in Web3

Last updated 1 month ago