I went digging into why Dusk rewards voters for supporting candidates from earlier, failed iterations.

At first, the process looks simple:

Proposal → Validation → Ratification

But the interesting part is what happens when an iteration fails.

Instead of letting the failed block disappear, Dusk gives later committees a reason to bring it back.

What surprised me is that this voter reward was added for a specific reason: to encourage future committees to vote on candidates from previous iterations.

So the protocol added a financial incentive to make recovering a failed block worth doing.

That makes a failed iteration less like a dead end and more like something the network is still willing to recover.

The interesting question is:
iIs Dusk smartly rewarding committees for finishing unfinished work, or does it show that recovery needs a financial push in the first place?

#dusk @Dusk $DUSK

Make it short