An issue that we noticed with the previous Content Creator category (replaced by the Application Creation and Maintenance category) was that there was always relatively little community interest compared to the other types of categories. Even with a slot that was more regular and a higher reward than the Community Builder category, we didn’t see a significant amount of community interest over the 12 months it was running. While the Community Builder category is much broader, we’d want to observe what the community interest in it is before we reevaluate it.

To add to that, unfortunately, the GLM Rewards Program doesn’t scale so well and wouldn’t be able to handle the overhead for a large number of small short-interval slots. The highest number of slots we did in a month was 18 (October, last year) where we had 10 extra slots for surveying and feedback which required more time than expected for tracking, KYC, test payments, and full payments.

I noticed Matias's response to a similar question, which only seems to embolden my thought that the approach towards some of the CIP rewards should be reconsidered. My thought is that there was "little community interest" because of the structure of payment. If you reconsider structuring how you reward certain CIP categories, I bet you would see a lot more participation.