Profile of Chain_L in Optimism
Posts by Chain_L
-
Exploring Optimism’s Broader Vision: Questions for My Thesis on Governance and Future Goals
by Chain_L - No Role
Posted on: Oct. 29, 2024, 2:49 a.m.
Content: Hi @Yonatan,
I would suggest having a conversation on Chora Club with a delegate that is available according to your time & get most questions answered.
Also, it provides an attestation on EAS for your conversation along with recording option to keep the conversation public. This will help delegate prove the work done by them to the DAO & you can prove it to the university.
Also, you may not find a better delegate & an active member like @brichis to answer you questions.
Likes: 0
Replies: 0
No likes yet.
No replies yet.
-
List of OP Grant
by Chain_L - No Role
Posted on: Oct. 14, 2024, 2:53 a.m.
Content: Sorry but what is PJ?
Likes: 1
Replies: 2
-
List of OP Grant
by Chain_L - No Role
Posted on: Oct. 13, 2024, 2:20 p.m.
Content: Hi,
Welcome to the forum.
Are you looking for a dedicated page showing all options of grants? Or all previous grants recipient?
Hopefully the clarity will ensure you get your answer.
Likes: 2
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
Measuring the Concentration of Power in the Collective
by Chain_L - No Role
Posted on: Oct. 4, 2024, 2:51 a.m.
Content: Thank you for your appreciation.
optimistic_emily:
I personally would love to be able to play around with the inputs to see how the outcomes are affected - like a kind of interactive simulator.
That’s a great feedback, we will get the simulator ready. :upside_down_face:
Likes: 1
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
Measuring the Concentration of Power in the Collective
by Chain_L - No Role
Posted on: Oct. 1, 2024, 4:14 a.m.
Content: This research analysis was conducted for the Optimism Collective as part of the Foundation Grant.
TL;DR
This research report presents the Concentration of Power Index (CPI), an adapted version of the traditional Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI), developed to assess the concentration of power within the Optimism Collective. By incorporating both individual delegate voting power and the influence of governance bodies - including Houses, Councils, and Committees (HCC) - the CPI provides a detailed view of governance dynamics. The report highlights key findings on power distribution, the role of delegates, and the CPI’s ability to adjust to changes in governance structures, showing its potential to guide policy changes and support decentralization efforts.
Acknowledgement
We sincerely thank the Optimism Collective for sponsoring and supporting this research. Their support allowed us to explore the governance structures within the Collective. We also want to thank @optimistic_emily & @elizaoak for their support and guidance, which were key to our research’s success. We thank @v 3 naru_Curia and the curiaLab team for their valuable data contributions wherever needed. This report could not have been completed without the collaboration of everyone involved, and we deeply appreciate their efforts. Lastly, we thank all survey participants for measuring each HCC’s influence.
Team - @ARDev 097 @Chain_L @Mary 17
Introduction
The governance structure of the Optimism Collective plays a key role in supporting decentralized decision-making and ensuring fair representation of stakeholders. However, with ongoing developments within the governance system, evaluating the concentration of power among delegates and governance bodies becomes important. This research report introduces the Concentration of Power Index (CPI), which enhances the traditional Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) to provide a clearer view of power dynamics. By assessing both individual voting power and the roles of different governance bodies, the CPI aims to check for potential risks related to power concentration while promoting fair governance practices.
Methods
The research began by gathering data on delegates’ voting power from Dune Analytics, offering insights into the influence of individual delegates within the Optimism Collective’s Token House. Information about the various councils and committees, including their members and responsibilities, was sourced from the Optimism Forum.
To accurately measure power concentration, the Concentration of Power Index (CPI) was created to factor in both the individual voting power of delegates and their participation across multiple governance bodies, such as Houses, Councils, and Committees (HCC). This dual approach enables a more detailed assessment of power dynamics and their effects on governance within the Optimism ecosystem.
Method for Measuring the Influence of Optimism Governance Houses, Councils, and Committees (HCC)
The framework for measuring influence is based on several key factors, including Decision-Making Authority, Scope of Influence, Community Engagement, Operational Independence, Voting Power, and Veto Power. Each factor is weighted to reflect its significance in the overall evaluation.
The governance structure comprises several Houses, Councils, and Committees (HCCs) such as the Token House, Citizens’ House, and Grants Councils. The weighted score of each HCC is calculated using specific formulas:
Token House:
image 1018 × 208 16 . 6 KB
Likewise, the weighted scores for other HCCs are calculated using similar formulas:
Method for Calculating the CPI:
The CPI was determined by combining the influence of Token House delegates with other governance layers, including various Houses, Councils, and Committees. This approach provides a more comprehensive measure of power concentration within the Optimism Collective.
CPI Formula: The Concentration of Power Index (CPI) is mathematically defined as follows:
image 1222 × 698 65 . 7 KB
This detailed methodology ensures that the CPI accurately captures the complex relationship between individual voting power and the collective influence of governance bodies, offering a reliable framework for analyzing power concentration within the Optimism Collective.
Results
Influence of Governance Bodies Within Optimism Collective
The table accompanying this report outlines the influence of each governance body, calculated using the weighted parameter scoring method. The Citizens’ House has the highest influence at 34 . 59 %, followed closely by the Token House at 32 . 33 %. The Grants Council (Builders & Growth Experiments Sub-committee) contributes 10 . 15 %, while the Security Council accounts for 13 . 17 %. Other bodies, such as the Grants Council (Milestone & Metrics Sub-committee) at 2 . 82 %, the Code of Conduct Council at 4 . 32 %, and the Developer Advisory Board at 3 . 01 %, have comparatively lower influence, reflecting the distribution of decision-making authority across the different governance bodies.
Governance Body
Percentage (%)
Token House (Th)
32 . 33 %
Citizens’ House (Ch)
34 . 59 %
Grants Council Builders & Growth Experiments Sub-committee (Gc)
10 . 15 %
Grants Council Milestone & Metrics Sub-committee (Gc(M&M))
2 . 82 %
Security Council (Sc)
13 . 17 %
Code of Conduct Council (CoC)
4 . 32 %
Developer Advisory Board (DAB)
3 . 01 %
Concentration of Power Index (CPI) Across Different Rounds and Seasons
The Concentration of Power Index (CPI), measured across different rounds and seasons, is shown in the graph below. The initial CPI for the Token House was 329 . 25 . After including data from Citizen House Round 2 and the councils for Season 3 , the CPI significantly dropped to 140 . 13 and remained stable during Season 4 . With the addition of data from Season 5 , the CPI further decreased to 91 . 81 , reflecting a clear trend toward decentralization. This trend continued with Citizen House Round 3 at 81 . 53 and Round 4 at 80 . 90 , highlighting the ongoing decentralization within the governance structure.
874 × 547 24 . 9 KB
Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) Across Different DAOs
The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) values for Optimism, Compound, Aave, and Uniswap are displayed in the graph below, showing the concentration of voting power among delegates within each DAO. The HHI for Optimism was calculated using only Token House delegates, without considering other governance layers, for easier comparison. The HHI values for Compound, Aave, and Uniswap were determined based on the distribution of voting power among their respective delegates.
859 × 547 24 . 1 KB
Concentration of Power Index (CPI) Across Different DAOs
The graph below displays the CPI values for Optimism, Compound, Aave, and Uniswap, representing the concentration of power in each DAO. Optimism’s CPI of 80 . 90 shows a decentralized power structure, while Compound’s 320 . 72 and Aave’s 627 . 34 indicate more centralized governance. Uniswap’s CPI of 215 . 29 suggests a balance between decentralization and concentration but is still less decentralized than Optimism. For other DAOs, only their delegate’s voting power is considered for this comparison.
859 × 547 24 KB
Nakamoto Coefficient Across Different DAOs
The Nakamoto Coefficient, which measures the minimum number of members needed to control over 51 % of the voting power, is represented in the bar chart below for Optimism, Compound, Aave, and Uniswap. Optimism requires 21 members to surpass this threshold, indicating relative decentralization. In contrast, Compound requires 13 members and Aave only 8 , reflecting a higher concentration of power. Uniswap’s Nakamoto Coefficient is 17 , suggesting a decentralized power structure, though slightly more concentrated than Optimism.
841 × 547 19 . 2 KB
Conclusion
The Concentration of Power Index (CPI) is a valuable tool for evaluating power distribution within the Optimism Collective. It improves on the traditional Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) by considering the influence of various governance bodies, such as Houses, Councils, and Committees. The CPI highlights areas where power is concentrated among a small group of delegates, raising concerns about over-centralization, while also identifying areas where power is more evenly spread, supporting decentralization. It provides a clearer understanding of the impact of delegates involved in multiple governance roles, offering a more detailed view of decision-making power. Additionally, the CPI can adapt to changes in governance structures, allowing for real-time assessments of power dynamics. By pinpointing periods of concentrated power and successful moves toward equitable distribution, the CPI helps guide policy changes and governance improvements. Ultimately, the CPI is key to maintaining decentralization and promoting a fair, inclusive governance structure within the Optimism Collective. The temporal chart of CPI can provide the direction in which our Collective is moving in terms of centralization as CPI is modified applying the same benchmark as HHI will not be an accurate measure.
image 1564 × 821 80 . 5 KB
Source:- CPI Site
Resources
Detailed Report Link - Report
Frontend Dashboard - Frontend Dashboard
Influence Calculator - Influence Calculator
Presentation Link - Presentation
Observation File - Observation File
Behind the Scenes Documentation - Behind the Scenes
GitHub Repo - Repo Link
Likes: 17
Replies: 0
Likers:
Euphoria,
Pumbi,
eugenia,
dmars300,
Hirangi_Pandya,
Megalod,
v3naru_Curia,
ARDev097,
brichis,
Mary17,
OPUser,
Mon,
web3magnetic,
MinimalGravitas,
Guiriba,
Bunnic,
elizaoak
No replies yet.
-
Measuring the Concentration of Power in the Collective
by Chain_L - No Role
Posted on: Oct. 1, 2024, 4:14 a.m.
Content: This research analysis was conducted for the Optimism Collective as part of the Foundation Grant 5 .
TL;DR
This research report presents the Concentration of Power Index (CPI), an adapted version of the traditional Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI), developed to assess the concentration of power within the Optimism Collective. By incorporating both individual delegate voting power and the influence of governance bodies - including Houses, Councils, and Committees (HCC) - the CPI provides a detailed view of governance dynamics. The report highlights key findings on power distribution, the role of delegates, and the CPI’s ability to adjust to changes in governance structures, showing its potential to guide policy changes and support decentralization efforts.
Acknowledgement
We sincerely thank the Optimism Collective for sponsoring and supporting this research. Their support allowed us to explore the governance structures within the Collective. We also want to thank @optimistic_emily & @elizaoak for their support and guidance, which were key to our research’s success. We thank @v 3 naru_Curia and the curiaLab team for their valuable data contributions wherever needed. This report could not have been completed without the collaboration of everyone involved, and we deeply appreciate their efforts. Lastly, we thank all survey participants for measuring each HCC’s influence.
Team - @ARDev 097 @Chain_L @Mary 17
Introduction
The governance structure of the Optimism Collective plays a key role in supporting decentralized decision-making and ensuring fair representation of stakeholders. However, with ongoing developments within the governance system, evaluating the concentration of power among delegates and governance bodies becomes important. This research report introduces the Concentration of Power Index (CPI), which enhances the traditional Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) to provide a clearer view of power dynamics. By assessing both individual voting power and the roles of different governance bodies, the CPI aims to check for potential risks related to power concentration while promoting fair governance practices.
Methods
The research began by gathering data on delegates’ voting power from Dune Analytics, offering insights into the influence of individual delegates within the Optimism Collective’s Token House. Information about the various councils and committees, including their members and responsibilities, was sourced from the Optimism Forum.
To accurately measure power concentration, the Concentration of Power Index (CPI) was created to factor in both the individual voting power of delegates and their participation across multiple governance bodies, such as Houses, Councils, and Committees (HCC). This dual approach enables a more detailed assessment of power dynamics and their effects on governance within the Optimism ecosystem.
Method for Measuring the Influence of Optimism Governance Houses, Councils, and Committees (HCC)
The framework for measuring influence is based on several key factors, including Decision-Making Authority, Scope of Influence, Community Engagement, Operational Independence, Voting Power, and Veto Power. Each factor is weighted to reflect its significance in the overall evaluation.
The governance structure comprises several Houses, Councils, and Committees (HCCs) such as the Token House, Citizens’ House, and Grants Councils. The weighted score of each HCC is calculated using specific formulas:
Token House:
image 1018 × 208 16 . 6 KB
Likewise, the weighted scores for other HCCs are calculated using similar formulas:
Method for Calculating the CPI:
The CPI was determined by combining the influence of Token House delegates with other governance layers, including various Houses, Councils, and Committees. This approach provides a more comprehensive measure of power concentration within the Optimism Collective.
CPI Formula: The Concentration of Power Index (CPI) is mathematically defined as follows:
image 1222 × 698 65 . 7 KB
This detailed methodology ensures that the CPI accurately captures the complex relationship between individual voting power and the collective influence of governance bodies, offering a reliable framework for analyzing power concentration within the Optimism Collective.
Results
Influence of Governance Bodies Within Optimism Collective
The table accompanying this report outlines the influence of each governance body, calculated using the weighted parameter scoring method. The Citizens’ House has the highest influence at 34 . 59 %, followed closely by the Token House at 32 . 33 %. The Grants Council (Builders & Growth Experiments Sub-committee) contributes 10 . 15 %, while the Security Council accounts for 13 . 17 %. Other bodies, such as the Grants Council (Milestone & Metrics Sub-committee) at 2 . 82 %, the Code of Conduct Council at 4 . 32 %, and the Developer Advisory Board at 3 . 01 %, have comparatively lower influence, reflecting the distribution of decision-making authority across the different governance bodies.
Governance Body
Percentage (%)
Token House (Th)
32 . 33 %
Citizens’ House (Ch)
34 . 59 %
Grants Council Builders & Growth Experiments Sub-committee (Gc)
10 . 15 %
Grants Council Milestone & Metrics Sub-committee (Gc(M&M))
2 . 82 %
Security Council (Sc)
13 . 17 %
Code of Conduct Council (CoC)
4 . 32 %
Developer Advisory Board (DAB)
3 . 01 %
Concentration of Power Index (CPI) Across Different Rounds and Seasons
The Concentration of Power Index (CPI), measured across different rounds and seasons, is shown in the graph below. The initial CPI for the Token House was 329 . 25 . After including data from Citizen House Round 2 and the councils for Season 3 , the CPI significantly dropped to 140 . 13 and remained stable during Season 4 . With the addition of data from Season 5 , the CPI further decreased to 91 . 81 , reflecting a clear trend toward decentralization. This trend continued with Citizen House Round 3 at 81 . 53 and Round 4 at 80 . 90 , highlighting the ongoing decentralization within the governance structure.
874 × 547 24 . 9 KB
Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) Across Different DAOs
The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) values for Optimism, Compound, Aave, and Uniswap are displayed in the graph below, showing the concentration of voting power among delegates within each DAO. The HHI for Optimism was calculated using only Token House delegates, without considering other governance layers, for easier comparison. The HHI values for Compound, Aave, and Uniswap were determined based on the distribution of voting power among their respective delegates.
859 × 547 24 . 1 KB
Concentration of Power Index (CPI) Across Different DAOs
The graph below displays the CPI values for Optimism, Compound, Aave, and Uniswap, representing the concentration of power in each DAO. Optimism’s CPI of 80 . 90 shows a decentralized power structure, while Compound’s 320 . 72 and Aave’s 627 . 34 indicate more centralized governance. Uniswap’s CPI of 215 . 29 suggests a balance between decentralization and concentration but is still less decentralized than Optimism. For other DAOs, only their delegate’s voting power is considered for this comparison.
859 × 547 24 KB
Nakamoto Coefficient Across Different DAOs
The Nakamoto Coefficient, which measures the minimum number of members needed to control over 51 % of the voting power, is represented in the bar chart below for Optimism, Compound, Aave, and Uniswap. Optimism requires 21 members to surpass this threshold, indicating relative decentralization. In contrast, Compound requires 13 members and Aave only 8 , reflecting a higher concentration of power. Uniswap’s Nakamoto Coefficient is 17 , suggesting a decentralized power structure, though slightly more concentrated than Optimism.
841 × 547 19 . 2 KB
Conclusion
The Concentration of Power Index (CPI) is a valuable tool for evaluating power distribution within the Optimism Collective. It improves on the traditional Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) by considering the influence of various governance bodies, such as Houses, Councils, and Committees. The CPI highlights areas where power is concentrated among a small group of delegates, raising concerns about over-centralization, while also identifying areas where power is more evenly spread, supporting decentralization. It provides a clearer understanding of the impact of delegates involved in multiple governance roles, offering a more detailed view of decision-making power. Additionally, the CPI can adapt to changes in governance structures, allowing for real-time assessments of power dynamics. By pinpointing periods of concentrated power and successful moves toward equitable distribution, the CPI helps guide policy changes and governance improvements. Ultimately, the CPI is key to maintaining decentralization and promoting a fair, inclusive governance structure within the Optimism Collective. The temporal chart of CPI can provide the direction in which our Collective is moving in terms of centralization as CPI is modified applying the same benchmark as HHI will not be an accurate measure.
image 1564 × 821 80 . 5 KB
Source:- CPI Site 11
Resources
Detailed Report Link - Report 13
Frontend Dashboard - Frontend Dashboard 11
Influence Calculator - Influence Calculator 6
Presentation Link - Presentation 2
Observation File - Observation File 1
Behind the Scenes Documentation - Behind the Scenes 2
GitHub Repo - Repo Link 3
Likes: 17
Replies: 0
Likers:
Euphoria,
Pumbi,
eugenia,
dmars300,
Hirangi_Pandya,
Megalod,
v3naru_Curia,
ARDev097,
brichis,
Mary17,
OPUser,
Mon,
web3magnetic,
MinimalGravitas,
Guiriba,
Bunnic,
elizaoak
No replies yet.
-
[Mission Request] Optimism as base for LRTs
by Chain_L - No Role
Posted on: July 8, 2024, 6:43 p.m.
Content: Great Mission Request, we definitely need to tap into the LRTs.
Does this mission intends to help launch a new LRT protocol or aims at attracting the existing ones on L 1 to OP Mainnet?
What type of applicant would successfully complete this mission?
Likes: 1
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
Season 6 Nominations: Code of Conduct Council
by Chain_L - No Role
Posted on: June 21, 2024, 1:26 p.m.
Content: Congratulations on successful passage of the proposal. :tada:
Can we know the process of completing Gravity DAO’s training and the details on whether it would be possible for any candidate to complete it before Season 6 starts or elections are over in the next voting cycle?
Thanks. Cheers.
Likes: 1
Replies: 2
Replies:
- maxwell: Hey yes - it’s recommended for candidates to explore the Gravity DAO’s training module if you’re interested in self-nominating for the Code of Conduct Council. The Council won’t kick off until a few weeks after Season 6.
- juankbell: There is an online course that can be done in this link at any time. Even when it is designed to be done in 5 weeks, it can also be done in a couple of days.
We also have this playlist from the training done on optimism for season 4 to complement the experience.
There is also a weekly study group hosted by RefiDAO members happening on tuesdays at 11AM EST / 8AM PST / 5PM CET where anyone can join to discuss the content or make questions.
Taking the training is not meant to be a blocker, but a good contextualización about the approach, skills and tools that are desired for conflict management workers, such as members of this council.
-
Grants Council Season 6 Nomination + Election Process Feedback
by Chain_L - No Role
Posted on: June 12, 2024, 6:41 p.m.
Content: The idea of having an Election Town Hall was different than previous seasons and I would consider it as a good way to get to know all the nominees. It was a well directed call completed in a limited time. I would love to see it added for any and every election across the councils and committees. :heart:
Likes: 4
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
Grants Council Season 6 Nomination + Election Process Feedback
by Chain_L - No Role
Posted on: June 12, 2024, 2:41 p.m.
Content: The idea of having an Election Town Hall was different than previous seasons and I would consider it as a good way to get to know all the nominees. It was a well directed call completed in a limited time. I would love to see it added for any and every election across the councils and committees. :heart:
Likes: 6
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
