Skip to main content

​
Overview

Stewards are trusted community members who review contributions, manage submissions, and help maintain the GenLayer Testnet Program. This guide covers the responsibilities and workflows for stewards.
Steward status is earned through exceptional contributions, not self-assigned. This guide is primarily for existing stewards.

​
What is a Steward?

Stewards in GenLayer:

Review Submissions

Evaluate contribution submissions and award points

Manage Community

Support community members and maintain guidelines

Ensure Quality

Maintain high standards for contributions

Guide Contributors

Help participants improve their submissions

​
Becoming a Steward

​
Path to Stewardship

Steward positions are earned, not applied for:
1

Build Reputation

Demonstrate excellence as a:
  • Validator (high uptime, quick upgrades)
  • Builder (quality projects, helpful tools)
  • Community member (support, education)
2

Climb the Leaderboard

Achieve top rankings through:
  • Consistent contributions
  • High-impact projects
  • Community engagement
3

Show Leadership

Demonstrate stewardship qualities:
  • Help other participants
  • Provide constructive feedback
  • Maintain professional conduct
  • Share knowledge freely
4

Receive Invitation

Core team identifies top contributors:
  • Invitation to steward role
  • Permissions granted
  • Access to steward tools
Do not request steward status. Focus on excellent contributions - stewardship will follow naturally.

​
Steward Responsibilities

​
Core Duties

Primary responsibility: Evaluate contribution submissionsFor each submission:
  • Verify evidence is legitimate
  • Assess quality and impact
  • Determine appropriate points (within type range)
  • Provide clear feedback
  • Make decision: Accept, Reject, or More Info
Expected turnaround: 24-48 hours

​
Steward Permissions

Stewards have granular permissions per contribution type:

​
Permission Types

Make proposals for submissions:
  • Suggest action (accept/reject/more info)
  • Propose point value
  • Draft steward reply
  • Requires approval from steward with ‘accept’ permission
Full review power:
  • Accept submissions directly
  • Set final point value
  • Create contributions
  • Create highlights (featured contributions)
Reject submissions:
  • Reject with feedback
  • Explain why it doesn’t meet requirements
  • Suggest improvements
Request additional details:
  • Ask for better evidence
  • Request clarification
  • Guide improvement
  • Submission returns to pending after update

​
Permission Scope

Permissions are granted per contribution type:
  • Steward A: Full permissions for Builder types
  • Steward B: Full permissions for Validator types
  • Steward C: Propose-only for all types
This ensures stewards review areas where they have expertise.

​
Review Workflow

​
Accessing Submissions

1

Navigate to Steward Dashboard

Click Stewards > Dashboard in the sidebar.Dashboard shows:
  • Total pending submissions
  • Submissions assigned to you
  • Recent activity
  • Review statistics
2

View Submissions List

Click Stewards > Submissions to see all pending.Use filters:
  • Status: Pending, Accepted, Rejected, More Info
  • Contribution Type: Filter by specific types
  • Assigned To: See your assignments
  • Search: Find by user or keywords
3

Select Submission

Click on a submission to open the review interface.

​
Review Interface

Each submission shows: Submission Details:
  • User information
  • Contribution type
  • Contribution date
  • Notes/description
  • Evidence items (URLs + descriptions)
  • Current status
Review Tools:
  • Point value selector (within type’s min/max)
  • Action buttons (Accept/Reject/More Info)
  • Steward reply field
  • Internal notes (visible only to stewards)
  • Proposal history (if applicable)
  • Create highlight option

​
Making a Decision

When accepting a submission:
1

Verify Evidence

  • Check all URLs are accessible
  • Confirm evidence matches claim
  • Verify authenticity (GitHub commits, etc.)
2

Assess Quality

Consider:
  • Completeness
  • Technical quality
  • Impact/usefulness
  • Effort required
3

Set Point Value

Choose points within type’s range:
  • Minimum: Meets basic requirements
  • Mid-range: Good quality work
  • Maximum: Exceptional contribution
4

Write Reply

Provide positive feedback:
  • Acknowledge the work
  • Highlight what was good
  • Encourage continued contributions
Example:
Great work on this smart contract! The code is 
well-structured and the README clearly explains 
the functionality. Awarding 150 points. Keep 
building!
5

Optional: Create Highlight

For exceptional work, check “Create Highlight”:
  • Add highlight title
  • Write description explaining why it’s noteworthy
  • Submission gets featured on dashboards
6

Click Accept

Submission processed:
  • Contribution created
  • Points awarded to user
  • User notified
  • Appears on their public profile

​
Proposal System

For stewards with Propose permission:

​
Making Proposals

1

Review Submission

Evaluate as normal, but you can’t finalize.
2

Create Proposal

Fill in proposal fields:
  • Proposed action (accept/reject/more info)
  • Proposed points (if accepting)
  • Proposed steward reply
  • Internal notes explaining your reasoning
3

Submit Proposal

Proposal saved and visible to approving stewards.
4

Await Approval

Steward with Accept permission:
  • Reviews your proposal
  • Can approve or modify
  • Finalizes the decision

​
Reviewing Proposals

For stewards with Accept permission:
1

See Proposed Submissions

Proposals highlighted in submission list.
2

Review Proposal

Check proposer’s:
  • Recommended action
  • Point value
  • Reasoning in notes
3

Approve or Modify

You can:
  • Accept proposal as-is (click “Approve Proposal”)
  • Modify points/reply and then accept
  • Override with different decision

​
Internal Notes

Stewards can add Internal Notes to submissions:

​
Purpose

  • Document your reasoning
  • Communicate with other stewards
  • Track proposal history
  • Note suspicious patterns
  • Record special considerations

​
Visibility

Internal notes are ONLY visible to stewards, never to the submitting user.

​
Usage

Internal Note Examples:

"Verified GitHub commits match the claimed dates."

"This is the user's 3rd contract deployment. Quality 
improving each time. Recommend accepting at mid-range."

"Evidence URL is broken. Will request more info."

"Exceptional tutorial - proposing highlight feature."

​
Point Guidelines

​
Determining Point Values

Within each type’s range, consider:

Scope

How much work was involved?

Quality

How well was it executed?

Impact

How useful is it to the community?

Completeness

Is it fully finished and polished?

​
Point Range Guide

For a type with range 50-300:
Basic quality:
  • Meets minimum requirements
  • Limited scope or impact
  • Could be improved
  • Acceptable but not exceptional
Example: Simple tutorial with just text, no code examples

​
Consistency

Aim for consistency with other stewards. Discuss edge cases in steward channels.
Best practices:
  • Review recent similar submissions
  • Consult steward templates
  • Ask other stewards for input on difficult cases
  • Document your reasoning in notes

​
Review Templates

Use predefined templates for common scenarios:

​
Acceptance Templates

Template: Quality Contract
"Excellent smart contract! The code is well-structured, 
fully tested, and clearly documented. Awarding [X] points. 
Keep up the great work!"

Template: Good Tutorial
"Great tutorial! Clear explanations and working examples. 
This will help many developers. Awarding [X] points."

Template: Useful Tool
"Fantastic developer tool! This solves a real problem and 
is well-documented. Awarding [X] points. Thank you for your 
contribution to the ecosystem!"

​
Rejection Templates

Template: Insufficient Evidence
"Thank you for your submission. Unfortunately, the evidence 
provided doesn't allow us to verify your work. Please provide 
[specific evidence needed] and resubmit. We're happy to review 
again with proper documentation."

Template: Wrong Type
"Thanks for contributing! However, this submission appears to 
better fit the '[other type]' category. Please resubmit under 
the correct type. Let us know if you have questions!"

Template: Quality Issues
"We appreciate your submission, but this doesn't meet the quality 
standards for this contribution type. Consider [specific 
improvements]. Feel free to submit again after addressing these 
points."

​
More Info Templates

Template: Need Repository
"Could you please provide the GitHub repository URL for the 
source code? This will help us evaluate the technical quality 
and award appropriate points. Thanks!"

Template: Need Deployment Proof
"Please add the transaction hash or contract address from 
GenLayer Explorer to verify the deployment. Once added, we'll 
review again promptly."

Template: Need Clarification
"Could you provide more details about [specific aspect]? This 
will help us better understand the scope and impact of your 
contribution. Thank you!"

​
Steward Best Practices

​
Reviewing

Be Timely

Review within 24-48 hours when possible

Be Thorough

Actually check evidence, don’t rubber-stamp

Be Fair

Apply consistent standards to all users

Be Helpful

Guide improvement, don’t just reject

​
Communication

Be Clear

Explain decisions in plain language

Be Constructive

Focus on improvement opportunities

Be Professional

Maintain respectful tone always

Be Encouraging

Acknowledge effort and progress

​
Managing Difficult Situations

​
Disputed Decisions

If a user disagrees with your review:
1

Listen to Their Perspective

Read their concerns carefully.
2

Explain Your Reasoning

Clarify why you made the decision.
3

Offer Path Forward

Suggest how they can improve and resubmit.
4

Escalate if Needed

For unresolved disputes, involve lead stewards.

​
Suspicious Activity

If you suspect abuse:
  • Don’t approve: Reject or request more info
  • Document in notes: Record your concerns
  • Report to team: Alert in steward Discord
  • Watch for patterns: Check user’s submission history

​
Unclear Cases

When unsure:
  • Ask other stewards: Get second opinions
  • Request more info: Get clarity from submitter
  • Use proposal system: Let experienced steward finalize
  • Document reasoning: Explain your thought process

​
Steward Contribution Tracking

Stewards also earn points for their steward work:

​
Community Support

Type: Community Support
Points: 20-100 based on volume and quality
Frequency: Weekly/monthly summaries
Evidence: Discord messages, support provided

​
Documentation

Type: Documentation
Points: 50-200 per contribution
Frequency: Per update
Evidence: PRs, published docs

​
Content Moderation

Type: Content Moderation
Points: 50-150 for regular periods
Frequency: Monthly
Evidence: Typically tracked by lead stewards
Steward administrative work (reviews) does not earn additional points - it’s a responsibility of the role. Points are for extra contributions beyond reviews.

​
Steward Resources

Steward Discord

Private #stewards channel for coordination

Review Dashboard

Track your review statistics and pending items

Guidelines Doc

Detailed review criteria and policies

Template Library

Collection of review message templates

​
Next Steps

Contribution Types

View all contribution types you can review

Evidence Guidelines

Review standards for acceptable evidence

Build docs developers (and LLMs) love

Get started for freeTalk to us