Profile of system in Optimism
Posts by system
-
Season 6: Voting Cycle Guides
by system - This user is a moderator
Posted on: Oct. 31, 2024, 6:43 p.m.
Content: Voting Cycle 30 : October 31 - November 20 :
October 31 - November 13 : Engage
Did you apply for a grant?
Grants Council Roundup for Cycle 29
Apply, Build, Nominate
Delegate Mission Requests are open until November 5 th at 19 : 00 GMT! View available mission requests here
To learn more about the grants council, find office hours and see the most up to date grant calendar – head over to their home page.
The Builders List is always available as a place to find inspiration for impact you can create in the Collective!
Choose an idea from the list, build it, create impact, and you might get rewarded via Retro Funding for your impact!
Tune In
Joint House Community Call – November 5 th at 19 : 00 GMT
Token House Community Call – November 19 th at 19 : 00 GMT
(Meeting links will be available on the Public Governance Calendar)
Office Hours
Grants Council Office Hours – November 4 th, 11 th, and 18 th at 17 : 00 GMT
govNERD Office Hours – November 7 th at 19 : 00 GMT
Builder Office Hours with the Foundation – November 13 th at 17 : 30 GMT
(Meeting links will be available on the Public Governance Calendar)
November 14 - November 20 : Vote!
Roundup Voting Cycle # 30
November 21 - November 27 : Veto
TBD
Likes: 1
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
Season 6: Voting Cycle Guides
by system - This user is a moderator
Posted on: Oct. 31, 2024, 6:43 p.m.
Content: Voting Cycle 30 : October 31 - November 20 :
October 31 - November 13 : Engage
Did you apply for a grant?
Grants Council Roundup for Cycle 29
Apply, Build, Nominate
Delegate Mission Requests are open until November 5 th at 19 : 00 GMT! View available mission requests here
To learn more about the grants council, find office hours and see the most up to date grant calendar – head over to their home page.
The Builders List 1 is always available as a place to find inspiration for impact you can create in the Collective!
Choose an idea from the list, build it, create impact, and you might get rewarded via Retro Funding for your impact!
Tune In
Joint House Community Call – November 5 th at 19 : 00 GMT
Token House Community Call – November 19 th at 19 : 00 GMT
(Meeting links will be available on the Public Governance Calendar 1 )
Office Hours
Grants Council Office Hours – November 4 th, 11 th, and 18 th at 17 : 00 GMT
govNERD Office Hours – November 7 th at 19 : 00 GMT
Builder Office Hours with the Foundation – November 13 th at 17 : 30 GMT
(Meeting links will be available on the Public Governance Calendar 1 )
November 14 - November 20 : Vote!
Roundup Voting Cycle # 30 3
November 21 - November 27 : Veto
TBD
Likes: 1
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
Voting Cycle Roundup #30
by system - This user is a moderator
Posted on: Oct. 30, 2024, 2:58 p.m.
Content: Cycle # 30 began on Thursday October 31 st at 19 : 00 GMT and runs until Wednesday November 20 th at 19 : 00 GMT. Additionally, the Citizens’ House will have a one-week period to veto any Upgrades approved by the Token House, immediately following the conclusion of the Token House Voting Period.
A snapshot of delegate voting weights will be taken at the time votes go live. Voting will take place at https://vote.optimism.io/ 4 starting on Thursday, November 14 th at 19 : 00 GMT. The Citizens’ House veto vote will take place via Snapshot from Thursday, November 21 st to Wednesday, November 27 th.
Likes: 3
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
Voting Cycle Roundup #30
by system - This user is a moderator
Posted on: Oct. 30, 2024, 2:58 p.m.
Content: Cycle # 30 began on Thursday October 31 st at 19 : 00 GMT and runs until Wednesday November 20 th at 19 : 00 GMT. Additionally, the Citizens’ House will have a one-week period to veto any Upgrades approved by the Token House, immediately following the conclusion of the Token House Voting Period.
A snapshot of delegate voting weights will be taken at the time votes go live. Voting will take place at https://vote.optimism.io/ starting on Thursday, November 14 th at 19 : 00 GMT. The Citizens’ House veto vote will take place via Snapshot from Thursday, November 21 st to Wednesday, November 27 th.
Likes: 4
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
Retro Funding 6: Bribery Policy
by system - This user is a moderator
Posted on: Oct. 29, 2024, 11:06 a.m.
Content: It is expected that Optimists 2 refrain from self-dealing. While opportunities for self-dealing in the Citizens’ House will be reduced via incentive design and voting mechanisms, the Foundation may implement additional measure to discourage self-dealing, to be defined at the beginning of each Round, while these mechanisms are further developed.
The Foundation has defined the below process to address bribery, if needed.
Over time, the consequences for bribery and other forms of self-dealing will be determined by the Citizens’ House and enforced via governance managed Citizenship Criteria.
Round 6 Anti-Bribery Policy
Reporting
You may report any verifiable instance of bribery using the form linked here 1 . All discussions and reports should be in accordance with the Rules of Engagement. 1
As onchain evidence of bribery is unlikely, three separate reports against the same briber (or directly affiliated party) will need to be filed for a case to be considered valid. This number is based upon the number of people required for a bribe have a meaningful impact on results and considering the potential disruption of false reports.
Enforcement
In the event 3 separate reports are filed, and the briber is another badgeholder, the bribing badgeholder will receive an attestation and be prohibited from participating in Season 6 .
In the event 3 separate reports are filed, and the briber is a project, the project will receive an attestation and be removed from the Round (ineligible to receive rewards in Round 6 ).
In the event any report is found to be invalid, the badgeholder will receive an attestation and will be ineligible to receive retroactive governance participant rewards for Round 6 .
Please note: In the future, governance will decide the set of attestations that permit or prohibit Citizenship.
Subject to Citizens’ House Approval
Before any enforcement action is taken, the Foundation must post a proposal summarizing the reported bribery incident and corresponding enforcement actions. The Citizens’ House will then have one week to veto any enforcement decisions proposed by the Foundation. If an enforcement action suggested by the Foundation is veto’d, no enforcement action will take place. New reports filed about the same instance will not be re-considered.
Likes: 2
Replies: 1
Replies:
- joanbp: system:
The Citizens’ House will then have one week to veto any enforcement decisions proposed by the Foundation.
Same question as for the self-dealing rule:
Simple majority?
-
Retro Funding 6: Bribery Policy
by system - This user is a moderator
Posted on: Oct. 29, 2024, 11:06 a.m.
Content: It is expected that Optimists refrain from self-dealing. While opportunities for self-dealing in the Citizens’ House will be reduced via incentive design and voting mechanisms, the Foundation may implement additional measure to discourage self-dealing, to be defined at the beginning of each Round, while these mechanisms are further developed.
The Foundation has defined the below process to address bribery, if needed.
Over time, the consequences for bribery and other forms of self-dealing will be determined by the Citizens’ House and enforced via governance managed Citizenship Criteria.
Round 6 Anti-Bribery Policy
Reporting
You may report any verifiable instance of bribery using the form linked here . All discussions and reports should be in accordance with the Rules of Engagement.
As onchain evidence of bribery is unlikely, three separate reports against the same briber (or directly affiliated party) will need to be filed for a case to be considered valid. This number is based upon the number of people required for a bribe have a meaningful impact on results and considering the potential disruption of false reports.
Enforcement
In the event 3 separate reports are filed, and the briber is another badgeholder, the bribing badgeholder will receive an attestation and be prohibited from participating in Season 6 .
In the event 3 separate reports are filed, and the briber is a project, the project will receive an attestation and be removed from the Round (ineligible to receive rewards in Round 6 ).
In the event any report is found to be invalid, the badgeholder will receive an attestation and will be ineligible to receive retroactive governance participant rewards for Round 6 .
Please note: In the future, governance will decide the set of attestations that permit or prohibit Citizenship.
Subject to Citizens’ House Approval
Before any enforcement action is taken, the Foundation must post a proposal summarizing the reported bribery incident and corresponding enforcement actions. The Citizens’ House will then have one week to veto any enforcement decisions proposed by the Foundation. If an enforcement action suggested by the Foundation is veto’d, no enforcement action will take place. New reports filed about the same instance will not be re-considered.
Likes: 2
Replies: 1
Replies:
- joanbp: system:
The Citizens’ House will then have one week to veto any enforcement decisions proposed by the Foundation.
Same question as for the self-dealing rule:
Simple majority?
-
Retro Funding 6: Self-dealing Policy
by system - This user is a moderator
Posted on: Oct. 29, 2024, 11:01 a.m.
Content: It is expected that Optimists 1 refrain from self-dealing. While opportunities for self-dealing in the Citizens’ House will be reduced via incentive design and voting mechanisms, the Foundation may implement additional measure to discourage self-dealing, to be defined at the beginning of each Round, while these mechanisms are further developed. The Foundation has defined the below process to address self-dealing in Round 6 , if needed.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure
Voters should not vote for organizations where they expect any portion of funds to flow to them or any projects from which they derive income. Voters will need to disclose their conflict of interest during their review of projects in the voting process. For each project they review, badgeholders will see the option to disclose a Conflict of Interest. Projects for which a badgeholder has disclosed a Conflict of Interest will be removed from the badgeholders ballot.
Reporting
To support the enforcement of rules, the Optimism Foundation will publish the Conflicts of Interests each badgeholder has disclosed following the end of the voting period.
You may report any verifiable instance of a conflict of interest rule violation using the form linked here 1 . Reports can be submitted up to Dec 18 th. All discussions and reports should be in accordance with the Rules of Engagement
For a report to be valid it needs to prove that a badgeholder has violated the Conflict of Interest rule. Information which is provided in a report needs to be timestamped and publicly verifiable.
Enforcement
In the event any report is found to be invalid, the badgeholder will receive an attestation and may be ineligible to receive retroactive governance participant rewards for Round 6 .
If a Conflict of Interest rule violation has been identified, the badgeholder will be prohibited from participating for the remainder of Season 6 . The badgeholder will not be eligible to receive Retro Governance Participation rewards in Season 6 .
If a Conflict of Interest rule violation has been identified and it’s the second violation, the badgeholder will lose their voting badge and be prohibited from receiving a new voting badge in Season 7 .
Subject to Citizens’ House Veto
Before any enforcement decision is subject to Citizens’ House veto. Before any enforcement action is taken, the Foundation must post a proposal summarizing the reported Conflict of Interest rule violation and corresponding enforcement actions. The Citizens’ House will then have one week to veto any enforcement decisions proposed by the Foundation. If an enforcement action suggested by the Foundation is veto’d, no enforcement action will take place. New reports filed about the same instance will not be re-considered.
Likes: 3
Replies: 1
Replies:
- joanbp: system:
Before any enforcement decision is subject to Citizens’ House veto
For clarity:
By simple majority, or…?
-
Retro Funding 6: Self-dealing Policy
by system - This user is a moderator
Posted on: Oct. 29, 2024, 11:01 a.m.
Content: It is expected that Optimists refrain from self-dealing. While opportunities for self-dealing in the Citizens’ House will be reduced via incentive design and voting mechanisms, the Foundation may implement additional measure to discourage self-dealing, to be defined at the beginning of each Round, while these mechanisms are further developed. The Foundation has defined the below process to address self-dealing in Round 6 , if needed.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure
Voters should not vote for organizations where they expect any portion of funds to flow to them or any projects from which they derive income. Voters will need to disclose their conflict of interest during their review of projects in the voting process. For each project they review, badgeholders will see the option to disclose a Conflict of Interest. Projects for which a badgeholder has disclosed a Conflict of Interest will be removed from the badgeholders ballot.
Reporting
To support the enforcement of rules, the Optimism Foundation will publish the Conflicts of Interests each badgeholder has disclosed following the end of the voting period.
You may report any verifiable instance of a conflict of interest rule violation using the form linked here. Reports can be submitted up to Dec 18 th. All discussions and reports should be in accordance with the Rules of Engagement
For a report to be valid it needs to prove that a badgeholder has violated the Conflict of Interest rule. Information which is provided in a report needs to be timestamped and publicly verifiable.
Enforcement
In the event any report is found to be invalid, the badgeholder will receive an attestation and may be ineligible to receive retroactive governance participant rewards for Round 6 .
If a Conflict of Interest rule violation has been identified, the badgeholder will be prohibited from participating for the remainder of Season 6 . The badgeholder will not be eligible to receive Retro Governance Participation rewards in Season 6 .
If a Conflict of Interest rule violation has been identified and it’s the second violation, the badgeholder will lose their voting badge and be prohibited from receiving a new voting badge in Season 7 .
Subject to Citizens’ House Veto
Before any enforcement decision is subject to Citizens’ House veto. Before any enforcement action is taken, the Foundation must post a proposal summarizing the reported Conflict of Interest rule violation and corresponding enforcement actions. The Citizens’ House will then have one week to veto any enforcement decisions proposed by the Foundation. If an enforcement action suggested by the Foundation is veto’d, no enforcement action will take place. New reports filed about the same instance will not be re-considered.
Likes: 3
Replies: 1
Replies:
- joanbp: system:
Before any enforcement decision is subject to Citizens’ House veto
For clarity:
By simple majority, or…?
-
Season 7: CFC Membership
by system - This user is a moderator
Posted on: Oct. 24, 2024, 6:12 p.m.
Content: CFC Membership
For the next iteration of the Collective Feedback Commission, we’re experimenting with a new membership selection method. As a reminder, pilot membership was determined via delegation rankings in the Token House and via demonstrable contributions in the Citizens’ House. The Token House selection method led to a high degree of overlap between members of the CFC and other leadership roles and the second iteration aims to make the Citizens’ House selection method more transparent and objective.
The below members have been selected to participate in the second iteration of the CFC, as described below for each track, based on their demonstrated contribution and expertise in a relevant domain, verifiable via attestations issued by the Foundation. The requirement for receiving a metagovernance attestation is implementation by the Foundation.
As the Collective scales, being able to identify the expertise and contributions of participants will be crucial for selecting the individuals best suited to a given role or decision. It will also allow the Collective to objectively select participants without resorting to plutocractic selection methods, an important principle in our Working Constitution (anti-plutocracy.) The selection of participants for the next iteration of the Collective Feedback Commission is a first step in this direction.
Participants (Nov 2024 - June 2025 )
Track
Category
Member
Attestation
Contribution
Operational
Citizens’ House processes
@joanbp
CFC membership + Application Reviewer in Round 3 ,Round 4 , and Round 5
Joan is one of two people in the Collective with this set of attestations. The other was selected to be a member for other contributions. See Joan’s extensive contributions to application review here
Operational
Token House processes
@SEEDGov
Metagovernance, Governance Process, Season 4 and Season 5
The Foundation used SEEDGov’s reports to inform the evolution of the Mission Request process in Season 4 and Season 5 .
Operational
Tooling and infrastructure testing
@amy
Foundation Mission Request, Collective Archive Maintenance, Season 4
Amy has built governance infrastructure and tooling used by the Foundation.
Organizational
Security Council Lead
@alisha.eth
Lead, Season 6
Organizational
Grants Council Lead
@Gonna.eth
Lead, Season 6
Organizational
Developer Advisory Board Lead
@zachobront
Lead, Season 6
Organizational
Anticapture Commission Lead
@web 3 magnetic
Lead, Season 6
Organizational
Code of Conduct Council Lead
@juankbell
Lead, Season 6
Design Research
Research & Experiments
@UniswapFoundation
Metagovernance, Experiment, Season 7
The Foundation will run a joint experiment involving prediction markets with the Uniswap Foundation in Season 7 .
Design Research
Research & Experiments
@jackanorak
Metagovernance, Governance Structure, Season 3 and Season 5
Jack had the original idea for the Protocol Delegation Program and the Developer Advisory Board, which were implemented by the Foundation in Seasons 3 and 5 , respectively.
Design Research
Evaluation Algorithms
@ccerv 1
Metagovernance, Metrics, Season 6
Open Source Observer created metrics that were implemented by the Foundation in Round 4 : Onchain Builders.
Design Research
Evaluation Algorithms
@LauNaMu
Metagovernance, Metrics, Season 6
LauNaMu created Metrics Garden which was implemented as part of Round 6 : Governance.
Design Research
Selection Algorithms
@gloriakw
Metagovernance, Infrastructure, Season 6
Gloria created the algorithm implemented by the Foundation to select Guest Voters in Round 5 .
Design Research
Selection Algorithms
@Gonna.eth and @zachobront
Leads, Season 6
Grants Council and Developer Advisory Board Lead.
Design Research
Voting Design
Kiran
Foundation Mission Request, Evaluating Voting Design Tradeoffs for Retro Funding, Season 6
Kiran has built voting simulation tooling used by the Foundation.
Design Research
Voting Design
@saraha
Metagovernance, Metrics, Season 6
Sarah Allen is partnering with the Foundation on a future experiment to implement oVBE as a measure of concentration of power.
Design Research
Decentralization
@kaereste
Metagovernance, Milestones, Season 6
L 2 BEATs established the definitive framework for stages of decentralization, which directly inspired the Foundation’s Decentralization Working Models.
Design Research
Decentralization
@spengrah
Metagovernance, Milestones, Season 5
Spencer’s article on Anticapture directly inspired the Foundation’s governance goals, as outlined here.
Design Research
Decentralization
@alisha.eth
Lead, Season 6
Security Council Lead.
Note: Current Leads will either be re-elected or replaced by Season 7 Leads who will participate for the rest of the term.
While this next iteration experiments with selection based on contributions demonstrating expertise and context, we are likely to continue experimenting with different selection methods in future iterations.
All members will be contact by @op_julian from the Foundation team to complete an opt-in form and KYC. Members that opt-in will receive an email invite to an onboarding call hosted on November 4 th at 15 : 00 GMT.
Likes: 21
Replies: 0
Likers:
joanbp,
Megalod,
Pumbi,
juankbell,
web3magnetic,
Tane,
ccerv1,
ismailemin,
mastermojo,
katie,
delphine,
dmars300,
Gonna.eth,
alexsotodigital,
Chain_L,
revmiller,
LauNaMu,
JashFi,
SEEDGov,
fujiar,
maintainer.eth
No replies yet.
-
Season 7: CFC Membership
by system - This user is a moderator
Posted on: Oct. 24, 2024, 6:12 p.m.
Content: CFC Membership
For the next iteration of the Collective Feedback Commission, we’re experimenting with a new membership selection method. As a reminder, pilot membership was determined via delegation rankings in the Token House and via demonstrable contributions in the Citizens’ House. The Token House selection method led to a high degree of overlap between members of the CFC and other leadership roles and the second iteration aims to make the Citizens’ House selection method more transparent and objective.
The below members have been selected to participate in the second iteration of the CFC, as described below for each track, based on their demonstrated contribution and expertise in a relevant domain, verifiable via attestations issued by the Foundation. The requirement for receiving a metagovernance attestation is implementation by the Foundation.
As the Collective scales, being able to identify the expertise and contributions of participants will be crucial for selecting the individuals best suited to a given role or decision. It will also allow the Collective to objectively select participants without resorting to plutocractic selection methods, an important principle in our Working Constitution 1 (anti-plutocracy.) The selection of participants for the next iteration of the Collective Feedback Commission is a first step in this direction.
Participants (Nov 2024 - June 2025 )
Track
Category
Member
Attestation
Contribution
Operational
Citizens’ House processes
@joanbp
CFC membership 4 + Application Reviewer in Round 3 ,Round 4 , and Round 5 1
Joan is one of two people in the Collective with this set of attestations. The other was selected to be a member for other contributions. See Joan’s extensive contributions to application review here
Operational
Token House processes
@SEEDGov
Metagovernance, Governance Process, Season 4 and Season 5
The Foundation used SEEDGov’s reports to inform the evolution of the Mission Request process in Season 4 1 and Season 5 .
Operational
Tooling and infrastructure testing
@amy
Foundation Mission Request, Collective Archive Maintenance 2 , Season 4
Amy has built governance infrastructure and tooling used by the Foundation.
Organizational
Security Council Lead
@alisha.eth
Lead, Season 6 1
Organizational
Grants Council Lead
@Gonna.eth
Lead, Season 6
Organizational
Developer Advisory Board Lead
@zachobront
Lead, Season 6
Organizational
Anticapture Commission Lead
@web 3 magnetic
Lead, Season 6 1
Organizational
Code of Conduct Council Lead
@juankbell
Lead, Season 6
Design Research
Research & Experiments
@UniswapFoundation
Metagovernance, Experiment, Season 7
The Foundation will run a joint experiment 8 involving prediction markets with the Uniswap Foundation in Season 7 .
Design Research
Research & Experiments
@jackanorak
Metagovernance, Governance Structure, Season 3 and Season 5
Jack had the original idea for the Protocol Delegation Program 2 and the Developer Advisory Board 1 , which were implemented by the Foundation in Seasons 3 and 5 , respectively.
Design Research
Evaluation Algorithms
@ccerv 1
Metagovernance, Metrics, Season 6
Open Source Observer created metrics that were implemented by the Foundation in Round 4 : Onchain Builders. 2
Design Research
Evaluation Algorithms
@LauNaMu
Metagovernance, Metrics, Season 6
LauNaMu created Metrics Garden 1 which was implemented as part of Round 6 : Governance.
Design Research
Selection Algorithms
@gloriakw
Metagovernance, Infrastructure, Season 6
Gloria created the algorithm 1 implemented by the Foundation to select Guest Voters in Round 5 .
Design Research
Selection Algorithms
@Gonna.eth and @zachobront
Leads, Season 6
Grants Council and Developer Advisory Board Lead.
Design Research
Voting Design
Kiran
Foundation Mission Request, Evaluating Voting Design Tradeoffs for Retro Funding 1 , Season 6
Kiran has built voting simulation tooling used by the Foundation.
Design Research
Voting Design
@saraha
Metagovernance, Metrics, Season 6 1
Sarah Allen is partnering with the Foundation on a future experiment to implement oVBE 4 as a measure of concentration of power.
Design Research
Decentralization
@kaereste
Metagovernance, Milestones, Season 6
L 2 BEATs established the definitive framework 1 for stages of decentralization, which directly inspired the Foundation’s Decentralization Working Models.
Design Research
Decentralization
@spengrah
Metagovernance, Milestones, Season 5
Spencer’s article on Anticapture 2 directly inspired the Foundation’s governance goals, as outlined here. 1
Design Research
Decentralization
@alisha.eth
Lead, Season 6
Security Council Lead.
Note: Current Leads will either be re-elected or replaced by Season 7 Leads who will participate for the rest of the term.
While this next iteration experiments with selection based on contributions demonstrating expertise and context, we are likely to continue experimenting with different selection methods in future iterations.
All members will be contact by @op_julian from the Foundation team to complete an opt-in form and KYC. Members that opt-in will receive an email invite to an onboarding call hosted on November 4 th at 15 : 00 GMT.
Likes: 18
Replies: 0
Likers:
joanbp,
Megalod,
Pumbi,
juankbell,
web3magnetic,
Tane,
ccerv1,
ismailemin,
mastermojo,
katie,
delphine,
dmars300,
Gonna.eth,
alexsotodigital,
Chain_L,
revmiller,
LauNaMu,
JashFi
No replies yet.
