Accumulator Neuron SNS Due Diligence - (Modclub)

I’d like to preface this by stating that this is in no means financial advice, nor is it meant to criticize the decentralized application in discussion. The following article is a collection of objective observations (of which have been objectively reviewed & verified by the Modclub Foundation), in regards to the Accumulator Neurons SNS Voting Criteria, which can be found in the resources below.


Accumulator Neuron SNS Voting Criteria

SNS Proposal Discussion

Protocol Documentation Relevant to Analysis

Protocol Abstract

Modclub is a decentralized “verification as a service” platform offering fast, accurate, and scalable Al-assisted moderation, Proof of Humanity verification and data labeling solutions. The dApp aims to ensure security, privacy, efficiency, and cost effectiveness for developers & users alike.


Main Net dApp

Is the dApp live and operational? Has the development team demonstrated technical competence specifically regarding the Internet Computer Protocol?

Yes, the Modclub dApp is currently live & operational (available here; ), within Canisters on the Internet Computer. As such, the team has demonstrated a degree technical competence & capability in relation to the Internet Computer Protocol.

Is the dApp fully on-chain, meaning both the front end and back end of the protocol are hosted in Canister smart contracts?

Currently, the majority of the Modclub dApp operates & resides on the Internet Computer blockchain, within Canister Smart Contracts & is therefor governable by the SNS Framework.

With this being said, it should be noted that the Email Notification Service, utilized to inform users of task status’, currently operates offchain, due to lacking functionality on the Internet Computer.

Additionally, it has been noted by the Modclub foundation that this functionality will be abolished, and replaced with an onchain mechanism, when the functionality is available.

Does the dApp rely on third-party dependencies, such as off-chain providers, fee-gated APIs, or other mechanisms that rely on intermediaries? If so, is there a plan to transfer these dependencies to Canisters and the SNS? Additionally, is there a plan to fund these mechanisms independently, without solely relying on the SNS Treasury?

The Modclub dApp has a few primary dependencies, with the majority being on-chain dApps or functionalities.

For example, the following list of on-chain dependencies is provided within the Modclub whitepaper;

Authentication Providers: Modclub integrates with the following authentication providers: Internet Identity, Plug Wallet, Stoic, Infinity Wallet. These providers allow users to create an account with Modclub and make secure authenticated requests to its endpoints.

UserGeek: Modclub integrates with UserGeek from the browser to anonymously collect and analyze user app usage data.

CanisterGeek: Modclub integrates with CanisterGeek to collect canister metrics such as: cycles remaining, memory usage and storage usage. These metrics are collected on a 24 hour basis. The goal is to allows a public dashboard so users are able to view Modclub usage and platform stability.

Cygnus: Modclub integrates with Cygnus which is a cycle management platform. It will automatically top up canisters that are low on cycles. Cygnus has intentions to decentralize their platform and allow an SNS to control parts of the platform. If this does not occur then Modclub will move to an approach similar to OpenChat and their Cycle management canister.

Alternatively, the following off-chain dependency is referenced;

Email Service: Modclub utilizes AWS SES to send notifications to moderators who have a task in their queue. When a new task is submitted to the main Modclub canister a set of users is randomly chosen to review the task, at this point the lambda service on AWS is called which then processes the list of users to send the notification to. Once email functionality is available on chain, this service will be deprecated and the onchain service will be used.

With dependencies laid out, it should be noted that the on-chain dependencies are controllable by the SNS DAO itself, while the off-chain dependency is not.

Furthermore, in respect to the dependencies provided, there are currently no fee-gated dependencies, which would require the support of alternative funding mechanisms.

Can the dApp, in its current form, be considered a complete product that fulfills its intended purpose? If the development team were to suddenly stop building, would the dApp still be able to function and achieve its objectives?

In my opinion, yes, in its current form, the Modclub dApp serves its intended purpose as a Proof of Humanity verification dApp.

In the instance the founding team were to discontinue the development of the protocol, I believe it is reasonable to say that the dApp could continue to provide a Proof of Humanity verification service, as the core functionalities are currently available.

With this being said, something that I noticed while reviewing the white paper is the potential for long term unsustainability in regards to moderation for scaling dApps - offering a potential vulnerability to the Modclub dApp.

For example, imagine a step by step scenario in which you are a dApp utilizing Modclub as a moderation service;

First, you must integrate the Modclub dApp, which should present minimal challenges via the provided SDK.

From there, you must set personal parameters & rule sets in regards to moderation of content.

Next, the dApp must manually flag content that are allegedly “breaking the rules”. It should be noted that it is planned to eventually implement an AI to do this filtering, however this service is not currently available.

Once content is flagged for review, Modclub moderators evaluate the content in regards to the rules the dApp has provided.

When consensus is achieved, the content is either removed or uncensored in respect to the determined outcome.

The dApp is then responsible for rewarding Modclub Moderators, in the form of $MOD, for completing this task.

Within a traditional moderation context, a dApp can freely give the ability to report / flag content that is deemed “inappropriate” to users - there is no flat rate costs associated per “task” to review.

However, under this model, given that there is a fee associated with every single moderation action, it is not feasible to give the freedom of reporting/flagging to the entirety of the platform.

This is due to how easy it becomes to drain “moderation funding reserves”, in light of excess “flagged” or “reported” content.

As such, the burden of moderation remains with the managing team of the dApp, as even with Modclub integration, they still have to manually submit content for review (of their own rules), to prevent abuse of the system & drainage of moderation funding.

Protocol Overview

Is the protocol open source?

Yes, the Modclub dApp is open source, and the code can be found below;

Has the team provided a clear white paper that details the protocol comprehensively? Additionally, is there technical documentation available that explains the underlying mechanisms, functionalities, and concepts of the protocol?

Yes, in my opinion, the Modclub Foundation has provided an extensive white paper, documenting the entirety of the protocol.

The white paper explicitly details relevant information, including but not limited to touching upon; a well defined introductory, problem statement, & solution, the depths of content moderation & proof of humanity, monetization models, market opportunities, the core team, and the vision of the DAO itself.

Is there an insightful overview of the tokenomics provided? Is token allocation responsible & proportionate?

Yes, I believe there is an insightful overview of tokenomics provided within the “Modclub SNS Tokenomics Paper”. The paper thoroughly introduces & details the utility of MOD tokens, token allocations, voting power, SNS Configurations, token liquidity & more, which can be found below;

The Initial $MOD Token Allocation can be found below;

Airdrop - 20m $MOD - 2%

Advisors - 50m $MOD - 5%

Seed - 51.65m $MOD - 5.165%

Pre-Seed - 66.85m $MOD - 6.685%

Team - 160m $MOD - 16%

Decentralization Sale - 225m $MOD - 22.5%

Reserve - 426.5m $MOD - 42.65%

This can be broken down further, into three categories; insider, community, protocol.

Insider - 21%

Team - 160m $MOD - 16%

Advisors - 50m $MOD - 5%

Community - 36.35%

Airdrop - 20m $MOD - 2%

Seed - 51.65m $MOD - 5.165%

Pre-Seed - 66.85m $MOD - 6.685%

Decentralization Sale - 225m $MOD - 22.5%

Protocol - 42.65%

Reserve - 426.5m $MOD - 42.65%

As a result of this break down, it can be noted that “Insiders” reserve ~57% of the amount being sold within the SNS sale (21% / 36.35% = 57.77%).

If you correlate this percentage to the SNS Sale, “Insiders” have equivocally reserved, at a minimum, ~370k ICP worth of $MOD upon completion of the SNS Sale.

As such, I can not agree that this is a fair token allocation.

Has the team articulated why the SNS is the ideal decentralization solution for their application at this time?

Yes, I do believe the Modclub Foundation has articulated strong reasoning behind their useage of the SNS, stating;

“With the completion of the DAO creation process, the operational Modclub service can be considered a public good, owned and governed by the community. Just as governance of the Internet Computer Protocol is open to anyone holding ICP utility tokens via NNS, MOD holders will have access to the same functionality via SNS. And, as in the case of staking to moderate, MOD holders would stake governance tokens in order to make proposals and vote. This helps to align the interests of all voters with the longer-term aims of the platform. After Modclub is established as a DAO, partners will have the option to reward for moderation and verification services using MOD tokens, while moderators will be rewarded with MOD tokens for their work. Any proceeds generated by Modclub will be redistributed to moderators in the form of MOD tokens. This ensures the alignment of incentives and the active participation of the Modclub community.”

Is the team publicly known within the ecosystem? Do they have a visible presence in the crypto community or relevant industry events?

I believe it is reasonable to say that select members of the Modclub Foundation are known & active members of the ICP ecosystem - such as Rhiannon. Furthermore, the Modclub dApp has been leveraged for its PoH functionality across various other dApps - showcasing its value-add to the ecosystem.

Is the team’s dynamic transparent? Do team members openly communicate and collaborate with the community?

Yes, I believe it is reasonable to say that the Modclub Foundation are transparent in their team dynamic (thoroughly documented within the whitepaper). Additionally, select members of the Modclub Foundation frequently interact with community members via Discord, Twitter & other channels.

What is the team’s track record and experience in the relevant field? Has the team made notable contributions to the ecosystem or relevant projects?

The Modclub Foundation has provided the following references to the teams experience & track record in the industry. With this being said, only first names are provided - as such, credentials can not be verified aside from select members with “LinkedIn” references.

Raheel, CEO and Founder

Modclub’s founder and CEO, Raheel has over a decade of experience in tech. Raheel is a seasoned software engineer with product development and leadership experience. He has worked at both big companies and small startups. He loves building products that solve problems and learning new technologies.

Pema, COO

An experienced public affairs and government relations advisor, Pema holds a master’s degree from the University of Toronto Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy. She brings her diverse international consulting experience to Modclub’s operations.

Nitesh, CTO

Nitesh is a software engineer with 7+ years of experience in product architecture and development. He finds joy in challenges and solving complex problems creatively.

Vitaliy, Lead Software Architect

Vitaliy is a software engineer with over 10 years of experience, and has been the technical lead at many companies including Origyn Foundation. He brings his deep technical knowledge of Motoko and Rust to Modclub.

Justin, Senior Full Stack Engineer

Justin is a seasoned engineer with experience as the technical lead of merchant onboarding and KYC at leading global online marketplace.

Patarawan, Junior Backend Engineer

Patarawan is Motoko Bootcamp graduate, a Master Blockchain and Digital Assets scholarship recipient, and holds a Master’s degree in Information Technology. Patarawan bring’s their enthusiasm for learning new technologies to the Modclub team.

Harvey, Front End Engineer

Harvey is an experienced front-end engineer and technical leader. He is an avid member of the IC community. He has trained up to 100 students on the fundamentals and key tools in building in Motoko on the IC.

Yvonne, Product Manager

Yvonne is an experienced product manager, with expertise in growth and onboarding. She has developed KYC and KYB functionality for a leading global online marketplace.

Rhiannon, Social Media and Community Manager

As an experienced leader and manager of several online communities, Rhiannon brings enthusiasm to her role. She has been building, supporting and growing Modclub’s online community. She has experience working with other dApps on the IC and the Dinity Foundation.

Proof of Valuation

Has the team shown comparable raises within the industry sector?

While the Modclub Whitepaper references estimated future total addressable markets, it does not show reference to comparable raises within the sector.

With this being said, this may be attributed to the fact that Modclub offers a unique moderation service, that may not have traditional web2 comparatives.

Does the valuation accurately address the current and potential market shares?

The math regarding the Modclub SNS sale evaluation is not publicly available, there for it is not possible to gauge whether the current valuation accurately reflects current & potential market shares.

With this being said, the Modclub whitepaper does reference estimated future market shares for various relevant industries.

Has the team provided transparency regarding the valuation? Is the valuation method disclosed, and is the math behind it available for review?

Given the math & evaluation method are publicly available or disclosed, no, I do not think it is reasonable to say that there is transparency regarding the Modclub evaluation process.

Security Audit

Is a security audit necessary for the application?

Given Modclub provides a Proof of Humanity service, which in turn has the potential to handle sensitive user information & data, yes, I believe it is reasonable that the Modclub dApp undergoes a security audit before SNS.

Has the code received at least some degree of review? Is there transparency and disclosure regarding the security measures taken?

Based on publicly provided information, I have not been able to find evidence of a code review for the Modclub dApp.

Neuron Fund Allocation

Is the Neuron Fund utilized? If so, what percentage of the sale is the Neuron Fund? If so, what is the size of the contribution in respect to the size of the Neuron Fund?

Yes, the Modclub Foundation has indicated the request for support from the Neuron Fund within the SNS Proposal.

The requested allocation from the Neuron Fund is 372,793 ICP, while the minimum amount to be raised is 650,000 ICP - equating to a contribution of 57.3% of the sale.

Alternatively, in the rare instance the SNS Sale meets its maximum contribution of 1,250,000 ICP, the Neuron Funds’ contribution equates to 29.8% of the sale.

As of present date, the Neuron Fund has a total maturity of 3,757,185 (ICP). Assuming a 1:1 conversion rate, the requested allocation equates to ~10% of the Neuron Fund - falling within DFINITY recommended guidelines.


In conclusion, the Modclub Foundation offers a well-defined overview of the dApp, open-source documentation and a comprehensive white paper, highlighting core components & functionalities, while simultaneously demonstrating the clear market fit within Blockchain Ecosystems.

The dApp’s dependencies, predominantly on-chain functionalities, are well-documented and controllable by the SNS DAO, ensuring a degree of independence. However, it’s worth noting that the Email Notification Service currently operates off-chain, though there are plans to transition to an on-chain mechanism when feasible.

With this being said, there is seemingly a lack of Code Review within the application, leaving potential vulnerabilities within the dApp unchecked. This concern is amplified when considering the dApp has the potential to handle valuable PoH data.

The Modclub dApp serves its intended purpose, with core functionalities available, even if development were to halt. However, potential scalability issues regarding moderation and funding sustainability have been identified, highlighting an aspect for consideration.

Additionally, the current exorbitant Neuron Fund request under the assumption of a Minimum Contribution results in the Neuron Fund contributing ~60% of the entire SNS Sale.

As such, the previous three points have resulted in my decision to “reject to postpone”, until amendments are made, as I do recognize the value a PoH service (such as Modclub) provides to not only the Internet Computer, but Blockchain Ecosystems as a whole.

Written July 28th

Submit for Review August 11th


If not already, you should setup a Patreon style account for these activities. I think it’s very helpful and would happily throw you a few ICP for your due diligence work


The Modclub Due Diligence has since been republished on Nuance, a decentralized publishing platform focused on rewarding the writer-reader relationship.

If you appreciate these Due Diligence efforts, feel free to support them within the dApp!

1 Like