# Evaluation

## Evaluation Process

Evaluators play a key role in assessing projects that apply for funding on Polimec. They are rewarded for accurate evaluations and penalized (slashed) for incorrect ones, encouraging them to back only high-potential projects. This ensures that only promising projects move forward for funding.

The following process ensures credible evaluations, transparent decision-making, and informed participation in the funding round:

1. **Due Diligence (7 Days)**

Evaluators review a project’s whitepaper, team, tokenomics, roadmap, and funding allocation before giving their assessment. The data room allows other participants to analyze evaluation results and make informed decisions.

2. **Bonding PLMC as Signal**

Evaluators bond PLMC to show confidence in a project’s success. Once bonded, the evaluation lock restricts the PLMC for use in funding rounds and voting only for that project. The lock remains until the funding round is completed or canceled.

3. **Enhancing Transparency and Visibility**

Evaluators can link their DID (Decentralized Identity) to social media profiles (Twitter, Telegram, Discord, GitHub, etc.) to increase credibility and reach. This allows their assessments to be easily shared, helping spread awareness about projects.

4. **Key Requirement: 10% Bonding Threshold**

A project only moves to the funding round if evaluators bond at least 10% of the target funding amount in PLMC (USD equivalent):

* **If the 10% threshold is** **not met**, the project does not proceed, and evaluators face no penalties.
* **If the 10% threshold is** **met**, the project enters the funding round, and evaluator rewards depend on the final amount raised compared to the target funding goal.

*Possible outcomes:*

| Thresholds | Outcome Project   | Outcome Evaluators | Outcome Participants        |
| ---------- | ----------------- | ------------------ | --------------------------- |
| ≤33%       | Rejected (autom.) | Slashed            | Refunded                    |
| >33%       | Accepted (autom.) | Rewarded           | Receive Contribution Tokens |

Should the total amount raised fall **at a level of 33% or below** of the target funding amount, the protocol automatically declines the project, slashes 20% of the evaluators’ bonded PLMC, and refunds the participants. The slashed PLMC are allocated to the on-chain treasury. The 33%-threshold incentivizes projects to raise funds in line with their expectations. It prevents unrealistic or excessively high valuations as well as participants getting stuck in an unsuccessful funding round.

Should the total amount raised fall **above 33%** of the target funding amount, the protocol automatically accepts the funding, evaluators are rewarded in the respective contribution tokens based on the amount raised for the project, and participants receive the respective contribution tokens based on their participation.

Based on the total amount raised compared to the target funding amount, the funding is automatically accepted or declined. The applicable settlement will occur 1 hour after the automatic outcome.

For detailed calculations, visit Polimec’s [**evaluator** **rewards allocation section**](/learn/funding-process/reward-payouts.md#evaluator-rewards-allocation).

PLMC bonded for evaluations can still be used to participate in the funding round of the evaluated project as well as for voting, and are released at the end of the funding round.

## Social Credit Building

The evaluation process includes gamification features, such as social credit building. Evaluators are scored based on past evaluations and can increase/decrease their scores to move up or down in the evaluator ranking.

Social credit building allows participants to follow evaluators they trust based on publicly available data. Social credit building generally narrows knowledge gaps, as one evaluator may emphasize technical aspects while another may focus more on the potential business case.

A visible track record of evaluators’ assessments further enhances accountability on the network. Furthermore, evaluators can link their pseudonymous[^1] identity with social media accounts (e.g. Twitter, Telegram, Discord, Youtube, Github) to increase, and benefit from, their community engagement.

[^1]: Practice of using a public key or wallet address where the identity of a person is unknown whereas it is still possible to assign related transactions to the same wallet.


---

# Agent Instructions: Querying This Documentation

If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation dynamically by asking a question.

Perform an HTTP GET request on the current page URL with the `ask` query parameter:

```
GET https://hub.polimec.org/learn/funding-process/evaluation.md?ask=<question>
```

The question should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language.
The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation.

Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.