UPDATE Q 2 2023 : we changed our name to SEED Latam. With this renewed image and enlargement of the scope, we are committed to support communities and leaders in Latam.
Read our vision here – Plataformas de delegados. ¿Por qué SEED Latam? — SEED Latam
To learn more about us – seedlatam.org
Following @GFXlabs and @OPUser initiatives, this is our thread with all our relevant decisions and participation in OP governance.
Presentation
DeFi LATAM is a spanish speaker community for the Web 3 & crypto ecosystem, focused on education and adoption of users in Latin America under the values of decentralization and towards the future of internet. We detect the potential of Ethereum’s scaling solutions for our region and for this reason we have decided to be a representative voice of the ideas and interests of this increasingly growing community in this part of the world.
Read our full presentation in Delegate Commitments thread here.
Delegate
joxes.defilatam.eth
Our procedure
With the help of numerous contributors and member of DeFi LATAM and Optimism Español, every decision made on behalf of DeFi LATAM in governance is discussed, agreed upon and communicated to all those interested in participating through our discussion channels on Discord:
DeFi LATAM>Gobernanza>Optimism-op.
Participation in the forum’s discussion threads in daily activities are own opinions of the delegate and contributors in their way to keep up with their roles and commitment to the governance; use of “we” or “us” shall apply when representing decisions or communications arising from the community, such as voting decisions and proposal submissions, all through this profile.
Special thanks to PEPO, Cryptochica, our contributors @AxlVaz, @NicoProducto, @Netrim, @ 994 .eth, all our community and people from Latin America who support us!
In 2023, the organization updated its name to SEED Latam to reflect a renewed image and expanded focus on supporting communities and leaders in Latin America. The group is actively involved in the DeFi LATAM and Optimism Español communities, offering insights, discussions, and decision-making support. Their involvement includes participation in governance discussions, representation of community interests, and contribution to the growth of the crypto ecosystem in Latin America. Special recognition is given to key individuals and contributors for their support in these efforts.
UPDATE Q 2 2023 : we changed our name to SEED Latam. With this renewed image and enlargement of t…
UPDATE Q 2 2023 : we changed our name to SEED Latam. With this renewed image and enlargement of the scope, we are committed to support communities and leaders in Latam.
Read our vision here – Plataformas de delegados. ¿Por qué SEED Latam? — SEED Latam 9
To learn more about us – seedlatam.org 4
Following @GFXlabs and @OPUser initiatives, this is our thread with all our relevant decisions and participation in OP governance.
Presentation
DeFi LATAM 11 is a spanish speaker community for the Web 3 & crypto ecosystem, focused on education and adoption of users in Latin America under the values of decentralization and towards the future of internet. We detect the potential of Ethereum’s scaling solutions for our region and for this reason we have decided to be a representative voice of the ideas and interests of this increasingly growing community in this part of the world.
Read our full presentation in Delegate Commitments thread here.
Delegate
joxes.defilatam.eth
Our procedure
With the help of numerous contributors and member of DeFi LATAM and Optimism Español, every decision made on behalf of DeFi LATAM in governance is discussed, agreed upon and communicated to all those interested in participating through our discussion channels on Discord 5 :
DeFi LATAM>Gobernanza>Optimism-op.
Participation in the forum’s discussion threads in daily activities are own opinions of the delegate and contributors in their way to keep up with their roles and commitment to the governance; use of “we” or “us” shall apply when representing decisions or communications arising from the community, such as voting decisions and proposal submissions, all through this profile.
Special thanks to PEPO, Cryptochica, our contributors @AxlVaz, @NicoProducto, @Netrim, @ 994 .eth, all our community and people from Latin America who support us!
UPDATE Q 2 2023 : we changed our name to SEED Latam. With this renewed image and enlargement of t…
UPDATE Q 2 2023 : we changed our name to SEED Latam. With this renewed image and enlargement of the scope, we are committed to support communities and leaders in Latam. Read our vision here – Plataformas de delegados. ¿Por qué SEED Latam? — SEED Latam 7 To learn more about us – seedlatam.org 2 Following @GFXlabs and @OPUser initiatives, this is our thread with all our relevant decisions and participation in OP governance. Presentation DeFi LATAM 11 is a spanish speaker community for the Web 3 & crypto ecosystem, focused on education and adoption of users in Latin America under the values of decentralization and towards the future of internet. We detect the potential of Ethereum’s scaling solutions for our region and for this reason we have decided to be a representative voice of the ideas and interests of this increasingly growing community in this part of the world. Read our full presentation in Delegate Commitments thread here. Delegate joxes.defilatam.eth Our procedure With the help of numerous contributors and member of DeFi LATAM and Optimism Español, every decision made on behalf of DeFi LATAM in governance is discussed, agreed upon and communicated to all those interested in participating through our discussion channels on Discord 5 : DeFi LATAM>Gobernanza>Optimism-op. Participation in the forum’s discussion threads in daily activities are own opinions of the delegate and contributors in their way to keep up with their roles and commitment to the governance; use of “we” or “us” shall apply when representing decisions or communications arising from the community, such as voting decisions and proposal submissions, all through this profile. Special thanks to PEPO, Cryptochica, our contributors @AxlVaz, @NicoProducto, @Netrim, @ 994 .eth, all our community and people from Latin America who support us!
Past actions.
Governance Fund Phase 0 voting decisions:
Proposal A - Batch Vote: For.
Reasons: …
Past actions.
Governance Fund Phase 0 voting decisions:
Proposal A - Batch Vote: For.
Reasons: we are ok supporting this proposal to start encouraging the growth of the optimism ecosystem. While we don’t agree with the vote taking place in a single batch, there is no reason to reject it among the 24 listed proposals included here.
Proposal B - Uniswap: Against.
Reasons: did not follow the guidelines.
Proposal C - 0 x: Against.
Reasons: did not follow the guidelines.
Governance Fund Phase 1 voting decisions:
Proposal A: Optimistic Railway: No
Reasons: in a very early stage, without clarity of what kind of positive impact it can have on the ecosystem.
Proposal B: dForce: Yes
Reasons: protocol of the first to deploy in Optimism. Acceptable proposal and detailed.
Proposal C: GYSR: No
Reasons: Amount higher than its potential use case. No clear strategy.
Proposal D: Mean Finance: Yes
Reasons: a one-of-a-kind protocol. Reasonable distribution. This project is well known and supported in our region.
Proposal E: Raptor: No
Reasons: does not apply to this phase.
Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX: Yes
Reasons: reasonable proposal in general terms, it seems positive to us.
Proposal G: Summa: No
Reasons: it doesn’t make sense at this stage, they ask for an excessive amount of tokens.
Proposal H: WardenSwap: No
Reasons: DEX aggregator. Not very interesting proposal. It would be good to see the deployment first to judge better.
Proposal I: Pickle Finance: Yes
Reasons: known team and protocol, reasonable proposal.
Proposal J: Ooki Protocol: No
Reasons: excessive amount for the protocol use case (see metrics in other chains). Author does not ensure co-incentives.
Proposal K: Infinity Wallet: Abstain
Reasons: difficult to evaluate, we leave it to the rest of the voters to establish their criteria.
Proposal L: Beefy: No
Reasons: excessive amount according to distribution. Not deployed at the time of decision.
Proposal M: 0 xHabitat: No
Reasons: from our perspective they should finish defining ideas and deploying in Optimism. Happy to re-evaluate later.
Proposal N: Thales: No
Reasons: this project received funding from Phase 0 . Distribution has not started yet. It’s counterproductive to approve new funds without evaluating the use of previous funds.
Proposal O: Paraswap: Yes
Reasons: reasonable proposal.
Proposal P: Roki: Yes
Reasons: well detailed proposal, interesting use case. Reasonable.
Proposal Q: Candide: Yes
Reasons: wallet focused on Rollups, with innovative features. Experimental proposal.
Other actions:
Proposal: Pause Phase 1 and start a discussion round to improve the governance process 7 .
Small improvements on Incentive Proposal Template for Phase 1 1 .
1 st Governance Call at DeFi LATAM ( 6 th July)
Several spaces, calls and on-line meetups (together with Optimism Español) in at differents spanish-speaker communities to talk about Optimism: scalability properties, vision and its governance.
Past actions.
Governance Fund Phase 0 voting decisions:
Proposal A - Batch Vote: For.
Reasons: …
Past actions.
Governance Fund Phase 0 voting decisions:
Proposal A - Batch Vote: For.
Reasons: we are ok supporting this proposal to start encouraging the growth of the optimism ecosystem. While we don’t agree with the vote taking place in a single batch, there is no reason to reject it among the 24 listed proposals included here.
Proposal B - Uniswap: Against.
Reasons: did not follow the guidelines.
Proposal C - 0 x: Against.
Reasons: did not follow the guidelines.
Governance Fund Phase 1 voting decisions:
Proposal A: Optimistic Railway: No
Reasons: in a very early stage, without clarity of what kind of positive impact it can have on the ecosystem.
Proposal B: dForce: Yes
Reasons: protocol of the first to deploy in Optimism. Acceptable proposal and detailed.
Proposal C: GYSR: No
Reasons: Amount higher than its potential use case. No clear strategy.
Proposal D: Mean Finance: Yes
Reasons: a one-of-a-kind protocol. Reasonable distribution. This project is well known and supported in our region.
Proposal E: Raptor: No
Reasons: does not apply to this phase.
Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX: Yes
Reasons: reasonable proposal in general terms, it seems positive to us.
Proposal G: Summa: No
Reasons: it doesn’t make sense at this stage, they ask for an excessive amount of tokens.
Proposal H: WardenSwap: No
Reasons: DEX aggregator. Not very interesting proposal. It would be good to see the deployment first to judge better.
Proposal I: Pickle Finance: Yes
Reasons: known team and protocol, reasonable proposal.
Proposal J: Ooki Protocol: No
Reasons: excessive amount for the protocol use case (see metrics in other chains). Author does not ensure co-incentives.
Proposal K: Infinity Wallet: Abstain
Reasons: difficult to evaluate, we leave it to the rest of the voters to establish their criteria.
Proposal L: Beefy: No
Reasons: excessive amount according to distribution. Not deployed at the time of decision.
Proposal M: 0 xHabitat: No
Reasons: from our perspective they should finish defining ideas and deploying in Optimism. Happy to re-evaluate later.
Proposal N: Thales: No
Reasons: this project received funding from Phase 0 . Distribution has not started yet. It’s counterproductive to approve new funds without evaluating the use of previous funds.
Proposal O: Paraswap: Yes
Reasons: reasonable proposal.
Proposal P: Roki: Yes
Reasons: well detailed proposal, interesting use case. Reasonable.
Proposal Q: Candide: Yes
Reasons: wallet focused on Rollups, with innovative features. Experimental proposal.
Other actions:
Proposal: Pause Phase 1 and start a discussion round to improve the governance process.
Small improvements on Incentive Proposal Template for Phase 1 .
1 st Governance Call at DeFi LATAM ( 6 th July)
Several spaces, calls and on-line meetups (together with Optimism Español) in at differents spanish-speaker communities to talk about Optimism: scalability properties, vision and its governance.
Past actions. Governance Fund Phase 0 voting decisions: Proposal A - Batch Vote: For. Reasons: …
Past actions. Governance Fund Phase 0 voting decisions: Proposal A - Batch Vote: For. Reasons: we are ok supporting this proposal to start encouraging the growth of the optimism ecosystem. While we don’t agree with the vote taking place in a single batch, there is no reason to reject it among the 24 listed proposals included here. Proposal B - Uniswap: Against. Reasons: did not follow the guidelines. Proposal C - 0 x: Against. Reasons: did not follow the guidelines. Governance Fund Phase 1 voting decisions: Proposal A: Optimistic Railway: No Reasons: in a very early stage, without clarity of what kind of positive impact it can have on the ecosystem. Proposal B: dForce: Yes Reasons: protocol of the first to deploy in Optimism. Acceptable proposal and detailed. Proposal C: GYSR: No Reasons: Amount higher than its potential use case. No clear strategy. Proposal D: Mean Finance: Yes Reasons: a one-of-a-kind protocol. Reasonable distribution. This project is well known and supported in our region. Proposal E: Raptor: No Reasons: does not apply to this phase. Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX: Yes Reasons: reasonable proposal in general terms, it seems positive to us. Proposal G: Summa: No Reasons: it doesn’t make sense at this stage, they ask for an excessive amount of tokens. Proposal H: WardenSwap: No Reasons: DEX aggregator. Not very interesting proposal. It would be good to see the deployment first to judge better. Proposal I: Pickle Finance: Yes Reasons: known team and protocol, reasonable proposal. Proposal J: Ooki Protocol: No Reasons: excessive amount for the protocol use case (see metrics in other chains). Author does not ensure co-incentives. Proposal K: Infinity Wallet: Abstain Reasons: difficult to evaluate, we leave it to the rest of the voters to establish their criteria. Proposal L: Beefy: No Reasons: excessive amount according to distribution. Not deployed at the time of decision. Proposal M: 0 xHabitat: No Reasons: from our perspective they should finish defining ideas and deploying in Optimism. Happy to re-evaluate later. Proposal N: Thales: No Reasons: this project received funding from Phase 0 . Distribution has not started yet. It’s counterproductive to approve new funds without evaluating the use of previous funds. Proposal O: Paraswap: Yes Reasons: reasonable proposal. Proposal P: Roki: Yes Reasons: well detailed proposal, interesting use case. Reasonable. Proposal Q: Candide: Yes Reasons: wallet focused on Rollups, with innovative features. Experimental proposal. Other actions: Proposal: Pause Phase 1 and start a discussion round to improve the governance process 7 . Small improvements on Incentive Proposal Template for Phase 1 1 . 1 st Governance Call at DeFi LATAM ( 6 th July) Several spaces, calls and on-line meetups (together with Optimism Español) in at differents spanish-speaker communities to talk about Optimism: scalability properties, vision and its governance.
In an effort made by community members, we have made a proposal to improve significatly the phase …
In an effort made by community members, we have made a proposal to improve significatly the phase 1 templates:
Update of the PHASE 1 protocol nomination template 4 .
In an effort made by community members, we have made a proposal to improve significatly the phase …
In an effort made by community members, we have made a proposal to improve significatly the phase 1 templates:
Update of the PHASE 1 protocol nomination template.
In an effort made by community members, we have made a proposal to improve significatly the phase …
In an effort made by community members, we have made a proposal to improve significatly the phase 1 templates: Update of the PHASE 1 protocol nomination template 3 .
Today our 2 nd Governance Call 2 was held after a past week as timeframe to discuss the proposal…
Today our 2 nd Governance Call 2 was held after a past week as timeframe to discuss the proposals of cycle # 3 . In this call we settled our discussions and vote as a community. The results can be found below with details and our feedbacks following the links:
Proposal A: Superfluid: Yes. 3
Proposal B: Kromatika: No. 1
Proposal C: Hundred Finance: No. 2
Proposal D: Biconomy: Yes. 1
Proposal E: Dope Wars: No.
Proposal F: Infinity Wallet: No.
Proposal G: DexGuru: No. 1
Proposal H: Overnightfi: No. 1
Proposal I: Saddle Finance: No. 1
Despite significant negative votes, we believe that our feedback and that of other delegates and community can be useful for several proposals to be successful in passing in the next cycles.
Today our 2 nd Governance Call was held after a past week as timeframe to discuss the proposals of…
Today our 2 nd Governance Call was held after a past week as timeframe to discuss the proposals of cycle # 3 . In this call we settled our discussions and vote as a community. The results can be found below with details and our feedbacks following the links:
Proposal A: Superfluid: Yes.
Proposal B: Kromatika: No.
Proposal C: Hundred Finance: No.
Proposal D: Biconomy: Yes.
Proposal E: Dope Wars: No.
Proposal F: Infinity Wallet: No.
Proposal G: DexGuru: No.
Proposal H: Overnightfi: No.
Proposal I: Saddle Finance: No.
Despite significant negative votes, we believe that our feedback and that of other delegates and community can be useful for several proposals to be successful in passing in the next cycles.
Today our 2 nd Governance Call 2 was held after a past week as timeframe to discuss the proposal…
Today our 2 nd Governance Call 2 was held after a past week as timeframe to discuss the proposals of cycle # 3 . In this call we settled our discussions and vote as a community. The results can be found below with details and our feedbacks following the links: Proposal A: Superfluid: Yes. 3 Proposal B: Kromatika: No. 1 Proposal C: Hundred Finance: No. 2 Proposal D: Biconomy: Yes. 1 Proposal E: Dope Wars: No. Proposal F: Infinity Wallet: No. Proposal G: DexGuru: No. 1 Proposal H: Overnightfi: No. 1 Proposal I: Saddle Finance: No. 1 Despite significant negative votes, we believe that our feedback and that of other delegates and community can be useful for several proposals to be successful in passing in the next cycles.
Hello all!
Last friday we held the 3 rd governance call on Discord 1 to discuss the proposals fo…
Hello all!
Last friday we held the 3 rd governance call on Discord 1 to discuss the proposals for cycle 4 . As in past calls, we focus on ratifying our decision as a community in the ongoing voting and also express opinions about the future of governance given the completion of Season 1 .
Participants: ~ 26 3 (special thanks to Pacha for the design) + various other members during discussion week.
As result, our vote for cycle # 4 has been as follows:
Proposal A: Rocket Pool: Yes. 6
Proposal B: Boardroom: Yes. 1
Proposal C: dHedge: No. 2
Proposal D: xToken Terminal and Gamma Strategies: No. 2
Proposal E: Byte Mason Product Suite: No. 2
Proposal F: GARD: No. 1
Proposal G: Beefy Finance: Yes. 4
Proposal H: BarnBridge: No. 1
Proposal I: QiDao: Yes. 3
Please click on Yes/No to read our conclusions.
We commend the projects that took the time to consider the feedback from the community and delegates that led to some successful proposals passing. For the rest, keep working on the proper queries in the forum for the next cycle of Phase 1 , see you in Season 2 !
Hello all!
Last friday we held the 3 rd governance call on Discord to discuss the proposals for cy…
Hello all!
Last friday we held the 3 rd governance call on Discord to discuss the proposals for cycle 4 . As in past calls, we focus on ratifying our decision as a community in the ongoing voting and also express opinions about the future of governance given the completion of Season 1 .
Participants: ~ 26 (special thanks to Pacha for the design) + various other members during discussion week.
As result, our vote for cycle # 4 has been as follows:
Proposal A: Rocket Pool: Yes.
Proposal B: Boardroom: Yes.
Proposal C: dHedge: No.
Proposal D: xToken Terminal and Gamma Strategies: No.
Proposal E: Byte Mason Product Suite: No.
Proposal F: GARD: No.
Proposal G: Beefy Finance: Yes.
Proposal H: BarnBridge: No.
Proposal I: QiDao: Yes.
Please click on Yes/No to read our conclusions.
We commend the projects that took the time to consider the feedback from the community and delegates that led to some successful proposals passing. For the rest, keep working on the proper queries in the forum for the next cycle of Phase 1 , see you in Season 2 !
Hello all! Last friday we held the 3 rd governance call on Discord 1 to discuss the proposals fo…
Hello all! Last friday we held the 3 rd governance call on Discord 1 to discuss the proposals for cycle 4 . As in past calls, we focus on ratifying our decision as a community in the ongoing voting and also express opinions about the future of governance given the completion of Season 1 . Participants: ~ 26 3 (special thanks to Pacha for the design) + various other members during discussion week. As result, our vote for cycle # 4 has been as follows: Proposal A: Rocket Pool: Yes. 6 Proposal B: Boardroom: Yes. 1 Proposal C: dHedge: No. 2 Proposal D: xToken Terminal and Gamma Strategies: No. 2 Proposal E: Byte Mason Product Suite: No. 2 Proposal F: GARD: No. 1 Proposal G: Beefy Finance: Yes. 4 Proposal H: BarnBridge: No. 1 Proposal I: QiDao: Yes. 3 Please click on Yes/No to read our conclusions. We commend the projects that took the time to consider the feedback from the community and delegates that led to some successful proposals passing. For the rest, keep working on the proper queries in the forum for the next cycle of Phase 1 , see you in Season 2 !
Today, we have formalized our participation in the formation of Governance Committees proposed for …
Today, we have formalized our participation in the formation of Governance Committees proposed for season 2 of Optimism governance.
Currently we’re part of two committees proposals as reviewers, details below:
Committee proposal: DeFi 3 , lead by @OPUser
We will be working alongside the following reviewers: Dhannte, MinimalGravitas, ScaleWeb 3 .
We feel very comfortable with our team, as each and every one of them has had an important presence in the governance for Season 1 to have culminated with relative success. Also, we share the same values strongly aligned to Optimism itself.
As expected, we will move so that the proposals make sense and everything is in accordance with alignments, proposed goals and shared values, while prioritizing long-term, genuine growth and derisk of gaming incentives.
[DRAFT] S 02 Committee Proposal: DeFi 3
Committee proposal: Tooling Governance Committee 1 , lead by @krzkaczor
We will be working alongside the following reviewers: lefterisjp, cryptotesters, ceresstation.
Tooling and infrastructure is probably one of the most undervalued topics and does not necessarily directly impact the conscious interests of the end user, as it does in the DeFi category with the usual standard liquidity mining programs and other incentives.
We are proud to have been able to deliver the proposal on time with a framework that we believe is an excellent starting point, considering the potential variety of proposals applying to this category and that we are ready to address as a team.
[DRAFT] S 02 Committee Proposal: Tooling Governance Committee 1
Our procedure in the current committees:
As we stated in our first post, currently this delegation is performed by Joxes (myself) as a leader alongside a team made up of spanish-speaking contributors with experience in DeFi and other topics. Some members have been enormously active as @Netrim @AxlVaz @NicoProducto and other committeed to this commitment, without this having to mean any type of obstacle, but on the contrary, rapid execution of any task, and preserving our original mission 1 as a community for Optimism governance.
In the formal instances/aspects, I bear all responsibility as leader and representative of DeFi LATAM, delegate and sole owner of this account and ENS.
About our participation in two differents committees:
We have absolute confidence in carrying out our work in favor of OP collective and these conditions were accepted by the rest of our committee teams. If the foundation, delegates or community strongly believe that this represents a severe problem, we can reach a resolution. However, we are pleased to contribute to making both proposals possible within the established times, and looking forward to season 2 being successful in all aspects.
Today, we have formalized our participation in the formation of Governance Committees proposed for …
Today, we have formalized our participation in the formation of Governance Committees proposed for season 2 of Optimism governance.
Currently we’re part of two committees proposals as reviewers, details below:
Committee proposal: DeFi, lead by @OPUser
We will be working alongside the following reviewers: Dhannte, MinimalGravitas, ScaleWeb 3 .
We feel very comfortable with our team, as each and every one of them has had an important presence in the governance for Season 1 to have culminated with relative success. Also, we share the same values strongly aligned to Optimism itself.
As expected, we will move so that the proposals make sense and everything is in accordance with alignments, proposed goals and shared values, while prioritizing long-term, genuine growth and derisk of gaming incentives.
[DRAFT] S 02 Committee Proposal: DeFi
Committee proposal: Tooling Governance Committee, lead by @krzkaczor
We will be working alongside the following reviewers: lefterisjp, cryptotesters, ceresstation.
Tooling and infrastructure is probably one of the most undervalued topics and does not necessarily directly impact the conscious interests of the end user, as it does in the DeFi category with the usual standard liquidity mining programs and other incentives.
We are proud to have been able to deliver the proposal on time with a framework that we believe is an excellent starting point, considering the potential variety of proposals applying to this category and that we are ready to address as a team.
[DRAFT] S 02 Committee Proposal: Tooling Governance Committee
Our procedure in the current committees:
As we stated in our first post, currently this delegation is performed by Joxes (myself) as a leader alongside a team made up of spanish-speaking contributors with experience in DeFi and other topics. Some members have been enormously active as @Netrim @AxlVaz @NicoProducto and other committeed to this commitment, without this having to mean any type of obstacle, but on the contrary, rapid execution of any task, and preserving our original mission as a community for Optimism governance.
In the formal instances/aspects, I bear all responsibility as leader and representative of DeFi LATAM, delegate and sole owner of this account and ENS.
About our participation in two differents committees:
We have absolute confidence in carrying out our work in favor of OP collective and these conditions were accepted by the rest of our committee teams. If the foundation, delegates or community strongly believe that this represents a severe problem, we can reach a resolution. However, we are pleased to contribute to making both proposals possible within the established times, and looking forward to season 2 being successful in all aspects.
Today, we have formalized our participation in the formation of Governance Committees proposed for …
Today, we have formalized our participation in the formation of Governance Committees proposed for season 2 of Optimism governance. Currently we’re part of two committees proposals as reviewers, details below: Committee proposal: DeFi 3 , lead by @OPUser We will be working alongside the following reviewers: Dhannte, MinimalGravitas, ScaleWeb 3 . We feel very comfortable with our team, as each and every one of them has had an important presence in the governance for Season 1 to have culminated with relative success. Also, we share the same values strongly aligned to Optimism itself. As expected, we will move so that the proposals make sense and everything is in accordance with alignments, proposed goals and shared values, while prioritizing long-term, genuine growth and derisk of gaming incentives. [DRAFT] S 02 Committee Proposal: DeFi 3 Committee proposal: Tooling Governance Committee 1 , lead by @krzkaczor We will be working alongside the following reviewers: lefterisjp, cryptotesters, ceresstation. Tooling and infrastructure is probably one of the most undervalued topics and does not necessarily directly impact the conscious interests of the end user, as it does in the DeFi category with the usual standard liquidity mining programs and other incentives. We are proud to have been able to deliver the proposal on time with a framework that we believe is an excellent starting point, considering the potential variety of proposals applying to this category and that we are ready to address as a team. [DRAFT] S 02 Committee Proposal: Tooling Governance Committee 1 Our procedure in the current committees: As we stated in our first post, currently this delegation is performed by Joxes (myself) as a leader alongside a team made up of spanish-speaking contributors with experience in DeFi and other topics. Some members have been enormously active as @Netrim @AxlVaz @NicoProducto and other committeed to this commitment, without this having to mean any type of obstacle, but on the contrary, rapid execution of any task, and preserving our original mission 1 as a community for Optimism governance. In the formal instances/aspects, I bear all responsibility as leader and representative of DeFi LATAM, delegate and sole owner of this account and ENS. About our participation in two differents committees: We have absolute confidence in carrying out our work in favor of OP collective and these conditions were accepted by the rest of our committee teams. If the foundation, delegates or community strongly believe that this represents a severe problem, we can reach a resolution. However, we are pleased to contribute to making both proposals possible within the established times, and looking forward to season 2 being successful in all aspects.
Hello all!
This monday we held our 4 th Governance Call in Discord to discuss and decide our votes…
Hello all!
This monday we held our 4 th Governance Call in Discord to discuss and decide our votes on selection of governance committees for season 2 , according to Voting Cycle # 5 . Following our ethos and role as delegate 1 , we carry out a decision-making process between our collaborators and the community we represent.
Participants: + 30 attendees ( 27 2 :medal_military:collected; special thanks again to Pacha for the design).
Duration: 1 hs 49 min. In the last quarter, we had the presence of a Boardroom member, who told us about his work on the project.
Below is a summary of this Governance Call:
Our voting procedure
After a review of each governance committee proposal received, we proceeded with the following format:
At first, we consulted the community on what should be the action of our delegation on our voting decision in the committees that we are part of (Tooling and DeFi - C). Through the discussion process we ratified the following decisions:
DeFi Committee [Group C] - we abstain
Tooling & Infrastructure Committee [Group A] - we abstain
We now continue to discuss what approach we should follow regarding our voting decision in the DeFi A and DeFi B committees, considering our participation in DeFi C. We received different opinions, reaching consensus on:
DeFi Committee [Group A] - we vote for
DeFi Committee [Group B] - we abstain
We finalize our voting decisions with the last NFT category committee:
NFT Committee [Group A] - we vote for
Our rational
Collaborators and community are aligned with the desire to help Optimism but also ensure that the governance processes are genuine and authentic. In our case, our internal communication ensures that our community members can express their preferences and discuss until a consensus is reached.
Regarding the vote for ourselves, we believe that it is not positive for the governance and leaves a bad signal with respect to the rest of the members of the governance and community who want to give their opinion and decide on our proposals.
Interestingly, as a community working as such since the beginning of Optimism governance, we present a possible option of being able to choose to vote in favor of a DeFi committee that best fits the governance objectives and with a solid proposal, in an attempt to express which committee different from ours is ideal for the role. In this case, the framework shown by committee A plus its members was the preferred option, with respect to committee B, whose framework is not well seen with said system of points explained. Notably, some major contributors considered abstention for all three groups to be a better path.
About the Optimism Foundation recommendation for voting for 1 or 2 committees, we take sides by voting in favor of the NFT committee as well, we truly believe that it is important for governance, and possible incursion into identity topic proposals should be ideal and critical to add experience for future iterations.
Final words
We are excited about the work done so far and to have the collaboration of the Optimism Español initiative to successfully carry out our entire participation process for Season 2 . If you are a Spanish speaker and want to join our community, don’t forget to visit our Discord 1 and stay tuned for future calls and updates.
Hello all!
This monday we held our 4 th Governance Call in Discord to discuss and decide our votes…
Hello all!
This monday we held our 4 th Governance Call in Discord to discuss and decide our votes on selection of governance committees for season 2 , according to Voting Cycle # 5 . Following our ethos and role as delegate, we carry out a decision-making process between our collaborators and the community we represent.
Participants: + 30 attendees ( 27 :medal_military:collected; special thanks again to Pacha for the design).
Duration: 1 hs 49 min. In the last quarter, we had the presence of a Boardroom member, who told us about his work on the project.
Below is a summary of this Governance Call:
Our voting procedure
After a review of each governance committee proposal received, we proceeded with the following format:
At first, we consulted the community on what should be the action of our delegation on our voting decision in the committees that we are part of (Tooling and DeFi - C). Through the discussion process we ratified the following decisions:
DeFi Committee [Group C] - we abstain
Tooling & Infrastructure Committee [Group A] - we abstain
We now continue to discuss what approach we should follow regarding our voting decision in the DeFi A and DeFi B committees, considering our participation in DeFi C. We received different opinions, reaching consensus on:
DeFi Committee [Group A] - we vote for
DeFi Committee [Group B] - we abstain
We finalize our voting decisions with the last NFT category committee:
NFT Committee [Group A] - we vote for
Our rational
Collaborators and community are aligned with the desire to help Optimism but also ensure that the governance processes are genuine and authentic. In our case, our internal communication ensures that our community members can express their preferences and discuss until a consensus is reached.
Regarding the vote for ourselves, we believe that it is not positive for the governance and leaves a bad signal with respect to the rest of the members of the governance and community who want to give their opinion and decide on our proposals.
Interestingly, as a community working as such since the beginning of Optimism governance, we present a possible option of being able to choose to vote in favor of a DeFi committee that best fits the governance objectives and with a solid proposal, in an attempt to express which committee different from ours is ideal for the role. In this case, the framework shown by committee A plus its members was the preferred option, with respect to committee B, whose framework is not well seen with said system of points explained. Notably, some major contributors considered abstention for all three groups to be a better path.
About the Optimism Foundation recommendation for voting for 1 or 2 committees, we take sides by voting in favor of the NFT committee as well, we truly believe that it is important for governance, and possible incursion into identity topic proposals should be ideal and critical to add experience for future iterations.
Final words
We are excited about the work done so far and to have the collaboration of the Optimism Español initiative to successfully carry out our entire participation process for Season 2 . If you are a Spanish speaker and want to join our community, don’t forget to visit our Discord and stay tuned for future calls and updates.
Hello all! This monday we held our 4 th Governance Call in Discord to discuss and decide our votes…
Hello all! This monday we held our 4 th Governance Call in Discord to discuss and decide our votes on selection of governance committees for season 2 , according to Voting Cycle # 5 . Following our ethos and role as delegate 1 , we carry out a decision-making process between our collaborators and the community we represent. Participants: + 30 attendees ( 27 2 :medal_military:collected; special thanks again to Pacha for the design). Duration: 1 hs 49 min. In the last quarter, we had the presence of a Boardroom member, who told us about his work on the project. Below is a summary of this Governance Call: Our voting procedure After a review of each governance committee proposal received, we proceeded with the following format: At first, we consulted the community on what should be the action of our delegation on our voting decision in the committees that we are part of (Tooling and DeFi - C). Through the discussion process we ratified the following decisions: DeFi Committee [Group C] - we abstain Tooling & Infrastructure Committee [Group A] - we abstain We now continue to discuss what approach we should follow regarding our voting decision in the DeFi A and DeFi B committees, considering our participation in DeFi C. We received different opinions, reaching consensus on: DeFi Committee [Group A] - we vote for DeFi Committee [Group B] - we abstain We finalize our voting decisions with the last NFT category committee: NFT Committee [Group A] - we vote for Our rational Collaborators and community are aligned with the desire to help Optimism but also ensure that the governance processes are genuine and authentic. In our case, our internal communication ensures that our community members can express their preferences and discuss until a consensus is reached. Regarding the vote for ourselves, we believe that it is not positive for the governance and leaves a bad signal with respect to the rest of the members of the governance and community who want to give their opinion and decide on our proposals. Interestingly, as a community working as such since the beginning of Optimism governance, we present a possible option of being able to choose to vote in favor of a DeFi committee that best fits the governance objectives and with a solid proposal, in an attempt to express which committee different from ours is ideal for the role. In this case, the framework shown by committee A plus its members was the preferred option, with respect to committee B, whose framework is not well seen with said system of points explained. Notably, some major contributors considered abstention for all three groups to be a better path. About the Optimism Foundation recommendation for voting for 1 or 2 committees, we take sides by voting in favor of the NFT committee as well, we truly believe that it is important for governance, and possible incursion into identity topic proposals should be ideal and critical to add experience for future iterations. Final words We are excited about the work done so far and to have the collaboration of the Optimism Español initiative to successfully carry out our entire participation process for Season 2 . If you are a Spanish speaker and want to join our community, don’t forget to visit our Discord 1 and stay tuned for future calls and updates.
Hello again!
This tuesday we had our 5 th Governance Call on DeFi LATAM with the collaboration of …
Hello again!
This tuesday we had our 5 th Governance Call on DeFi LATAM with the collaboration of Optimism Español 1 to discuss the proposals of voting cycle # 6 . In this call we shared our experience in this first cycle of season 2 as members of the Tooling and DeFi C committees. In this call we share our experience in this first cycle of season 2 as members of the Tooling and DeFi C committees, and settle our discussions as a community on the decision-making of the current proposals, as usual.
Participants: + 35 1 (special thanks to Pacha for the design). Duration: 2 h, 37 min.
A summary about our performance during Cycle # 6
Keeping our intention to work as a group, we established an initial team (@AxlVaz, @Netrim, @Jadmat) with contributors to our delegation on behalf of DeFi LATAM. First, through Joxes (me) as a direct member of the mentioned committees, we focus on organizing ourselves and dividing the tasks, doing the pertinent research and finalizing discussions in order to deliver our analyzes, follow up, and the committee to work as expected.
Additionally, our members have been active in the forum addressing different proposals and other topics, which has helped a lot directly or indirectly to obtain the respective clarifications on each one and going forward.
We’re really satisfied with the work done so far, and our lessons for the next cycle are quite obvious, work faster internally and have even more presence on the forum; by example, using our delegation to pass the appropriate proposals to the next snapshot round, in our own criteria.
Our voting procedure
Our procedure remains intact as previous Governance Calls, we encourage our members interested in Optimism to express their opinion and be an active part of the final decision-making, as a way of absorbing the expertise, criteria and preferences of all in a single voice, more beyond the views of direct contributors a Joxes.
In the first place, we ratify with a YES to take into consideration and as a priority the recommendations of all the committees, being a starting point to decide how to vote on each proposal. As part of two committees, this also allowed everyone to quickly get into context where needed and discuss how it should be.
As result, our vote for cycle # 6 has been as follows:
Interest Protocol 2 1 : For
Following DeFi C committee recommendation, one of the highlights is the improved lending model introduced in Interest, which would be good to see in this ecosystem.
Socket 1 : Against
Following Tooling committee recommendation, we reiterate that the amount requested is seen as excessive, so we will be attentive in the next cycle to receive feedback and suggest the appropriate changes to make it favorable from the point of view of governance criteria. @khuranarishabh
OptiChads 1 : For
Following NFT & Gaming committee recommendation, we see as positive some of the intentions of the project towards Optimism. However, we’re aware that the NFT ecosystem is plagued with a lot of skepticism and some of our members expressed doubts as to whether the proposal would really add value to Optimism. In the end, we will remain “optimistic” so that this project and proposal makes sense and is fulfilled for our ecosystem. @Dicaso
Kromatika: For
Following DeFi A committee recommendation, we’re pleased to know that your proposal has made the relevant changes compared to the previous cycle in season 1 , where we voted against. Now the proposal was seen as reasonable.
Revert Compoundor 2 : For
Following DeFi A committee recommendation, as a community we believe that Revert has an interesting implementation to take advantage of Uniswap on behalf of LPs. The proposal was seen as seen as reasonable.
Bankless Academy v 2 3 : For
Following Tooling committee recommendation, this academy is characterized by having a good reputation in the Ethereum ecosystem, additionally its added value will be potentially very beneficial for onboarding users in the globe. In particular, from DeFi LATAM we share many of these values that the Bankless community upholds and we’re pleased that communities like these are given the opportunity to promote initiatives such as the one in the proposal. The proposal itself is seen as reasonable. @Tetranome
Across Protocol: For
Following Tooling committee recommendation, from the community we want to emphasize that optimistically designed bridges are of our full interest and we have closely followed teams like this throughout the year. For this reason we believe that accepting proposals like this will be positive for the diversity of bridges with acceptable safety models for the future of the Optimism ecosystem.
Tarot 1 : Against
Following DeFi A committee recommendation, the problem with this proposal is as the committee points out, we are happy that the Tarot team has already submitted a new draft 2 based on the feedback received. @TigrisOfGaul
Otterspace 1 : Against.
Following Tooling committee recommendation, some members of DeFi LATAM community expressed their knowledge of the work of otterspace, however, the niche in which this project tries to capture deserves a review of the proposal to adjust it to the likely impact it may have if the ideas presented are implemented. We will be addressing it again for the next cycle 2 with the corresponding feedback. @Lukas
dHEDGE DAO 2 : Against
Against the recommendation of the DeFi C committee, our community had a lengthy discussion near the close of voting and during this governance call about the impact and use of funds proposed by dHedge. Although the proposal can be seen as positive in terms of encouraging pool management and increasing its adoption, for the moment we were concerned about some points about its criteria, such as the lack of clearer parameters on which pools to benefit and under what regime. At the moment it’s specified that whitlisted pools will be supported and with their own governance procedure, of which we have observed a certain degree of centralization in decision making, so we encourage dHedge to allow its community to express itself genuinely about the pools to incentivize in Optimism. We believe that in this case the weight of conflict of interest should be avoided or clarified. Additionally, incentivizing this pool with its governance token is seen as a standard approach that doesn’t affect the evaluation of the proposal. Since the proposal has passed successfully, we encourage dHedge and its governance to have a fair criteria in favor of the users of the Optimism ecosystem when deciding which pools to incentivize. @Cyrus
We’re very happy with how the community has organized and shown interest in the future of the Optimism ecosystem and its governance. Alentamos a la comunidad hispanohablante y de latinoamérica a que se unan a nuestra travesía por el futuro de Optimism. :red_circle:_:red_circle:
Hello again!
This tuesday we had our 5 th Governance Call on DeFi LATAM with the collaboration of …
Hello again!
This tuesday we had our 5 th Governance Call on DeFi LATAM with the collaboration of Optimism Español to discuss the proposals of voting cycle # 6 . In this call we shared our experience in this first cycle of season 2 as members of the Tooling and DeFi C committees. In this call we share our experience in this first cycle of season 2 as members of the Tooling and DeFi C committees, and settle our discussions as a community on the decision-making of the current proposals, as usual.
Participants: + 35 (special thanks to Pacha for the design). Duration: 2 h, 37 min.
A summary about our performance during Cycle # 6
Keeping our intention to work as a group, we established an initial team (@AxlVaz, @Netrim, @Jadmat) with contributors to our delegation on behalf of DeFi LATAM. First, through Joxes (me) as a direct member of the mentioned committees, we focus on organizing ourselves and dividing the tasks, doing the pertinent research and finalizing discussions in order to deliver our analyzes, follow up, and the committee to work as expected.
Additionally, our members have been active in the forum addressing different proposals and other topics, which has helped a lot directly or indirectly to obtain the respective clarifications on each one and going forward.
We’re really satisfied with the work done so far, and our lessons for the next cycle are quite obvious, work faster internally and have even more presence on the forum; by example, using our delegation to pass the appropriate proposals to the next snapshot round, in our own criteria.
Our voting procedure
Our procedure remains intact as previous Governance Calls, we encourage our members interested in Optimism to express their opinion and be an active part of the final decision-making, as a way of absorbing the expertise, criteria and preferences of all in a single voice, more beyond the views of direct contributors a Joxes.
In the first place, we ratify with a YES to take into consideration and as a priority the recommendations of all the committees, being a starting point to decide how to vote on each proposal. As part of two committees, this also allowed everyone to quickly get into context where needed and discuss how it should be.
As result, our vote for cycle # 6 has been as follows:
Interest Protocol 2 : For
Following DeFi C committee recommendation, one of the highlights is the improved lending model introduced in Interest, which would be good to see in this ecosystem.
Socket: Against
Following Tooling committee recommendation, we reiterate that the amount requested is seen as excessive, so we will be attentive in the next cycle to receive feedback and suggest the appropriate changes to make it favorable from the point of view of governance criteria. @khuranarishabh
OptiChads: For
Following NFT & Gaming committee recommendation, we see as positive some of the intentions of the project towards Optimism. However, we’re aware that the NFT ecosystem is plagued with a lot of skepticism and some of our members expressed doubts as to whether the proposal would really add value to Optimism. In the end, we will remain “optimistic” so that this project and proposal makes sense and is fulfilled for our ecosystem. @Dicaso
Kromatika: For
Following DeFi A committee recommendation, we’re pleased to know that your proposal has made the relevant changes compared to the previous cycle in season 1 , where we voted against. Now the proposal was seen as reasonable.
Revert Compoundor: For
Following DeFi A committee recommendation, as a community we believe that Revert has an interesting implementation to take advantage of Uniswap on behalf of LPs. The proposal was seen as seen as reasonable.
Bankless Academy v 2 : For
Following Tooling committee recommendation, this academy is characterized by having a good reputation in the Ethereum ecosystem, additionally its added value will be potentially very beneficial for onboarding users in the globe. In particular, from DeFi LATAM we share many of these values that the Bankless community upholds and we’re pleased that communities like these are given the opportunity to promote initiatives such as the one in the proposal. The proposal itself is seen as reasonable. @Tetranome
Across Protocol: For
Following Tooling committee recommendation, from the community we want to emphasize that optimistically designed bridges are of our full interest and we have closely followed teams like this throughout the year. For this reason we believe that accepting proposals like this will be positive for the diversity of bridges with acceptable safety models for the future of the Optimism ecosystem.
Tarot: Against
Following DeFi A committee recommendation, the problem with this proposal is as the committee points out, we are happy that the Tarot team has already submitted a new draft based on the feedback received. @TigrisOfGaul
Otterspace: Against.
Following Tooling committee recommendation, some members of DeFi LATAM community expressed their knowledge of the work of otterspace, however, the niche in which this project tries to capture deserves a review of the proposal to adjust it to the likely impact it may have if the ideas presented are implemented. We will be addressing it again for the next cycle with the corresponding feedback. @Lukas
dHEDGE DAO: Against
Against the recommendation of the DeFi C committee, our community had a lengthy discussion near the close of voting and during this governance call about the impact and use of funds proposed by dHedge. Although the proposal can be seen as positive in terms of encouraging pool management and increasing its adoption, for the moment we were concerned about some points about its criteria, such as the lack of clearer parameters on which pools to benefit and under what regime. At the moment it’s specified that whitlisted pools will be supported and with their own governance procedure, of which we have observed a certain degree of centralization in decision making, so we encourage dHedge to allow its community to express itself genuinely about the pools to incentivize in Optimism. We believe that in this case the weight of conflict of interest should be avoided or clarified. Additionally, incentivizing this pool with its governance token is seen as a standard approach that doesn’t affect the evaluation of the proposal. Since the proposal has passed successfully, we encourage dHedge and its governance to have a fair criteria in favor of the users of the Optimism ecosystem when deciding which pools to incentivize. @Cyrus
We’re very happy with how the community has organized and shown interest in the future of the Optimism ecosystem and its governance. Alentamos a la comunidad hispanohablante y de latinoamérica a que se unan a nuestra travesía por el futuro de Optimism. :red_circle:_:red_circle:
Hello again! This tuesday we had our 5 th Governance Call on DeFi LATAM with the collaboration of …
Hello again! This tuesday we had our 5 th Governance Call on DeFi LATAM with the collaboration of Optimism Español 1 to discuss the proposals of voting cycle # 6 . In this call we shared our experience in this first cycle of season 2 as members of the Tooling and DeFi C committees. In this call we share our experience in this first cycle of season 2 as members of the Tooling and DeFi C committees, and settle our discussions as a community on the decision-making of the current proposals, as usual. Participants: + 35 1 (special thanks to Pacha for the design). Duration: 2 h, 37 min. A summary about our performance during Cycle # 6 Keeping our intention to work as a group, we established an initial team (@AxlVaz, @Netrim, @Jadmat) with contributors to our delegation on behalf of DeFi LATAM. First, through Joxes (me) as a direct member of the mentioned committees, we focus on organizing ourselves and dividing the tasks, doing the pertinent research and finalizing discussions in order to deliver our analyzes, follow up, and the committee to work as expected. Additionally, our members have been active in the forum addressing different proposals and other topics, which has helped a lot directly or indirectly to obtain the respective clarifications on each one and going forward. We’re really satisfied with the work done so far, and our lessons for the next cycle are quite obvious, work faster internally and have even more presence on the forum; by example, using our delegation to pass the appropriate proposals to the next snapshot round, in our own criteria. Our voting procedure Our procedure remains intact as previous Governance Calls, we encourage our members interested in Optimism to express their opinion and be an active part of the final decision-making, as a way of absorbing the expertise, criteria and preferences of all in a single voice, more beyond the views of direct contributors a Joxes. In the first place, we ratify with a YES to take into consideration and as a priority the recommendations of all the committees, being a starting point to decide how to vote on each proposal. As part of two committees, this also allowed everyone to quickly get into context where needed and discuss how it should be. As result, our vote for cycle # 6 has been as follows: Interest Protocol 2 1 : For Following DeFi C committee recommendation, one of the highlights is the improved lending model introduced in Interest, which would be good to see in this ecosystem. Socket 1 : Against Following Tooling committee recommendation, we reiterate that the amount requested is seen as excessive, so we will be attentive in the next cycle to receive feedback and suggest the appropriate changes to make it favorable from the point of view of governance criteria. @khuranarishabh OptiChads 1 : For Following NFT & Gaming committee recommendation, we see as positive some of the intentions of the project towards Optimism. However, we’re aware that the NFT ecosystem is plagued with a lot of skepticism and some of our members expressed doubts as to whether the proposal would really add value to Optimism. In the end, we will remain “optimistic” so that this project and proposal makes sense and is fulfilled for our ecosystem. @Dicaso Kromatika: For Following DeFi A committee recommendation, we’re pleased to know that your proposal has made the relevant changes compared to the previous cycle in season 1 , where we voted against. Now the proposal was seen as reasonable. Revert Compoundor 2 : For Following DeFi A committee recommendation, as a community we believe that Revert has an interesting implementation to take advantage of Uniswap on behalf of LPs. The proposal was seen as seen as reasonable. Bankless Academy v 2 3 : For Following Tooling committee recommendation, this academy is characterized by having a good reputation in the Ethereum ecosystem, additionally its added value will be potentially very beneficial for onboarding users in the globe. In particular, from DeFi LATAM we share many of these values that the Bankless community upholds and we’re pleased that communities like these are given the opportunity to promote initiatives such as the one in the proposal. The proposal itself is seen as reasonable. @Tetranome Across Protocol: For Following Tooling committee recommendation, from the community we want to emphasize that optimistically designed bridges are of our full interest and we have closely followed teams like this throughout the year. For this reason we believe that accepting proposals like this will be positive for the diversity of bridges with acceptable safety models for the future of the Optimism ecosystem. Tarot 1 : Against Following DeFi A committee recommendation, the problem with this proposal is as the committee points out, we are happy that the Tarot team has already submitted a new draft 2 based on the feedback received. @TigrisOfGaul Otterspace 1 : Against. Following Tooling committee recommendation, some members of DeFi LATAM community expressed their knowledge of the work of otterspace, however, the niche in which this project tries to capture deserves a review of the proposal to adjust it to the likely impact it may have if the ideas presented are implemented. We will be addressing it again for the next cycle 2 with the corresponding feedback. @Lukas dHEDGE DAO 2 : Against Against the recommendation of the DeFi C committee, our community had a lengthy discussion near the close of voting and during this governance call about the impact and use of funds proposed by dHedge. Although the proposal can be seen as positive in terms of encouraging pool management and increasing its adoption, for the moment we were concerned about some points about its criteria, such as the lack of clearer parameters on which pools to benefit and under what regime. At the moment it’s specified that whitlisted pools will be supported and with their own governance procedure, of which we have observed a certain degree of centralization in decision making, so we encourage dHedge to allow its community to express itself genuinely about the pools to incentivize in Optimism. We believe that in this case the weight of conflict of interest should be avoided or clarified. Additionally, incentivizing this pool with its governance token is seen as a standard approach that doesn’t affect the evaluation of the proposal. Since the proposal has passed successfully, we encourage dHedge and its governance to have a fair criteria in favor of the users of the Optimism ecosystem when deciding which pools to incentivize. @Cyrus We’re very happy with how the community has organized and shown interest in the future of the Optimism ecosystem and its governance. Alentamos a la comunidad hispanohablante y de latinoamérica a que se unan a nuestra travesía por el futuro de Optimism. :red_circle:_:red_circle:
Thanks for including a link to Tarot’s new proposal. It now focuses exclusively on direct incentive…
Thanks for including a link to Tarot’s new proposal. It now focuses exclusively on direct incentives within Tarot, for borrowing activity (OP-based, and other Optimism pairs) and lending (OP, ETH, and USDC).
Thanks for including a link to Tarot’s new proposal. It now focuses exclusively on direct incentive…
Thanks for including a link to Tarot’s new proposal. It now focuses exclusively on direct incentives within Tarot, for borrowing activity (OP-based, and other Optimism pairs) and lending (OP, ETH, and USDC).
Hi frens!
This last monday we held our 6 th Governance Call in Discord to discuss about our decisi…
Hi frens!
This last monday we held our 6 th Governance Call in Discord to discuss about our decisions on cycle # 7 . We continue sharing our experience as delegates and part of governance committees. This call was made just after Devcon week.
Participants: + 17 3 . Duration: 2 h 12 min.
A summary about our performance during Cycle # 7
As we said, this cycle happened during Devcon week (particularly during delegate feedback and voting weeks), in this case we work with our contributors to realize our tasks at time, but for example, some final coordination problems caused a delay at delivering all the tooling committee recommendations at time.
Our voting procedure
Continuing with our process explained in previous governance calls, we discussed the present proposals, ratifying once again the one taken into account by the governance committees or expressing our own rationale otherwise.
As result, our vote for cycle # 7 has been as follows:
Abracadabra Money: Against. 1
Overtime Markets: Against.
Overnight dot fi: Against 1 .
Sushiswap: Against.
Tarot: For.
Alchemix: Against 2 .
Dope Wars: Against 1 .
Otterspace: For 1 .
Rainbow Wallet: For 1 .
Karma (Delegate Dashboard): For 1 .
Karma (Discourse forum plugin): For.
Safe: For.
Li Fi: For 1 .
Yearn: For 2 .
Some notes about our presence on Ethlatam and Devcon
With great joy, members of DeFi LATAM community between Optimism Español and Layer 2 en Español joined forces to have a presence all day in various stands during the Ethlatam event held on October 10 at the same venue prior to the Devcon.
Also, our community participated in the following talks:
Erik Suazo “How to participate in DAO governance” disscusing about the state of Optimism Collective and how contribute. Full video here.
Joxes and Axl “Introduction to Optimism”, a talk to explain how Optimism works and future with bedrock. Full video here 2 .
A very very special thanks to @NicoProducto (leading Optimism Español), @CryptoChica and rest ethlatam organizers for make it possible and Optimism Foundation for support us.
The rest of Devcon week we were attending EthBogotá, Rollup Day and Devcon, talking at the Optimism booths as well as meeting various governance delegates and our committee team members. We’re very happy that the whole Ethereum community had a great time in our continent, South America.
Hi frens!
This last monday we held our 6 th Governance Call in Discord to discuss about our decisi…
Hi frens!
This last monday we held our 6 th Governance Call in Discord to discuss about our decisions on cycle # 7 . We continue sharing our experience as delegates and part of governance committees. This call was made just after Devcon week.
Participants: + 17 . Duration: 2 h 12 min.
A summary about our performance during Cycle # 7
As we said, this cycle happened during Devcon week (particularly during delegate feedback and voting weeks), in this case we work with our contributors to realize our tasks at time, but for example, some final coordination problems caused a delay at delivering all the tooling committee recommendations at time.
Our voting procedure
Continuing with our process explained in previous governance calls, we discussed the present proposals, ratifying once again the one taken into account by the governance committees or expressing our own rationale otherwise.
As result, our vote for cycle # 7 has been as follows:
Abracadabra Money: Against.
Overtime Markets: Against.
Overnight dot fi: Against.
Sushiswap: Against.
Tarot: For.
Alchemix: Against.
Dope Wars: Against.
Otterspace: For.
Rainbow Wallet: For.
Karma (Delegate Dashboard): For.
Karma (Discourse forum plugin): For.
Safe: For.
Li Fi: For.
Yearn: For.
Some notes about our presence on Ethlatam and Devcon
With great joy, members of DeFi LATAM community between Optimism Español and Layer 2 en Español joined forces to have a presence all day in various stands during the Ethlatam event held on October 10 at the same venue prior to the Devcon.
Also, our community participated in the following talks:
Erik Suazo “How to participate in DAO governance” disscusing about the state of Optimism Collective and how contribute. Full video here.
Joxes and Axl “Introduction to Optimism”, a talk to explain how Optimism works and future with bedrock. Full video here.
A very very special thanks to @NicoProducto (leading Optimism Español), @CryptoChica and rest ethlatam organizers for make it possible and Optimism Foundation for support us.
The rest of Devcon week we were attending EthBogotá, Rollup Day and Devcon, talking at the Optimism booths as well as meeting various governance delegates and our committee team members. We’re very happy that the whole Ethereum community had a great time in our continent, South America.
Hi frens! This last monday we held our 6 th Governance Call in Discord to discuss about our decisi…
Hi frens! This last monday we held our 6 th Governance Call in Discord to discuss about our decisions on cycle # 7 . We continue sharing our experience as delegates and part of governance committees. This call was made just after Devcon week. Participants: + 17 3 . Duration: 2 h 12 min. A summary about our performance during Cycle # 7 As we said, this cycle happened during Devcon week (particularly during delegate feedback and voting weeks), in this case we work with our contributors to realize our tasks at time, but for example, some final coordination problems caused a delay at delivering all the tooling committee recommendations at time. Our voting procedure Continuing with our process explained in previous governance calls, we discussed the present proposals, ratifying once again the one taken into account by the governance committees or expressing our own rationale otherwise. As result, our vote for cycle # 7 has been as follows: Abracadabra Money: Against. 1 Overtime Markets: Against. Overnight dot fi: Against 1 . Sushiswap: Against. Tarot: For. Alchemix: Against 2 . Dope Wars: Against 1 . Otterspace: For 1 . Rainbow Wallet: For 1 . Karma (Delegate Dashboard): For 1 . Karma (Discourse forum plugin): For. Safe: For. Li Fi: For 1 . Yearn: For 2 . Some notes about our presence on Ethlatam and Devcon With great joy, members of DeFi LATAM community between Optimism Español and Layer 2 en Español joined forces to have a presence all day in various stands during the Ethlatam event held on October 10 at the same venue prior to the Devcon. Also, our community participated in the following talks: Erik Suazo “How to participate in DAO governance” disscusing about the state of Optimism Collective and how contribute. Full video here. Joxes and Axl “Introduction to Optimism”, a talk to explain how Optimism works and future with bedrock. Full video here 2 . A very very special thanks to @NicoProducto (leading Optimism Español), @CryptoChica and rest ethlatam organizers for make it possible and Optimism Foundation for support us. The rest of Devcon week we were attending EthBogotá, Rollup Day and Devcon, talking at the Optimism booths as well as meeting various governance delegates and our committee team members. We’re very happy that the whole Ethereum community had a great time in our continent, South America.
Hi again!
We’re always posting our procedures and activities, so this monday 11 / 7 we had our 7…
Hi again!
We’re always posting our procedures and activities, so this monday 11 / 7 we had our 7 th Governance Call in DeFi LATAM in collaboration with Optimism Español to discuss the proposals of last voting cycle (# 8 ). We continue to share our experiences as delegates and part of the governance committees in this season 2 . This call was one of the longest we had and with a lot of debate about the proposals. We also had the pleasure of having the delegate @olimpio in our discussion with the community.
Participants: + 18 2 attendees. Duration 3 hs. As always, many thanks to our contributor Pacha for the design of these POAP series.
Our voting procedure
Our procedure remains intact as the previous governance calls, we encourage our members interested in Optimism and its ecosystem to express their opinion and be an active part of the final decision-making, as a way to absorb the experience, criteria and preferences of all in one voice. During this round we were able to observe more participation/discussion from our community members.
As a result, our vote for cycle # 8 has been the following:
Alchemix: For
Following DeFi committee A recommendations. In the previous period Alchemix received important feedback and they moved forward by resubmitting the proposal. Our community saw the changes applied by the Alchemix team very positively
Arrakis Finance: Against
The three points considered by Committee A were well considered by our community. Also, the intentions of helping new illiquid projects on Uniswap V 3 are noble, but it is appropriate to give more details of this approach and avoid gambling incentives, or else start low to judge the results later. Happy to see an improvement to the proposition, as boosting Uniswap liquidity is a positive for the broader ecosystem, more often than not.
Symphony Finance: Against
Committee A showed two important points to correct and our community also agreed. The Latam community is convinced that Symphony adds value to the ecosystem, it’s popular among the members of our community. However, a more focused proposal is expected.
Homora V 2 x Ironbank: Against
Our community voted against the recommendation of the Defi C committee. The reasons are those expressed by several governance delegates, HomoraV 2 in close source and the biggest beneficiary of the proposal is Iron Bank. Homora is a protocol used by members of our community, some members also collaborate with their community.
Angle Protocol: For
Following DeFi C committee recommendations, forex currencies like agEUR are a space worth boosting for asset diversity in the Optimism ecosystem. Also, Angle’s track record is respectable so far, which is why our community leaned towards this proposal.
InsureDAO: For
Following DeFi C committee recommendations. The insurance protocols aren’t widely used among members of the community or ecosystem in general, for various reasons such as their lack of efficiency in a good fit to the DeFi ecosystem and complexity of understanding, but organic growth demonstrated so far, the coverage of a large number of protocols within Optimism and the KPIs proposed by the team, were essential for the decision made by the community.
Curve: For
Following DeFi C committee recommendations. Curve is one of the most popular protocols among the members of our community, not only because of the incentives generated in Ethereum and other chains, but also because of its solid history without vulnerabilities and great developers teams that have behind. We expect to see the same traction on Optimism.
Pool together: For
Following DeFi C committee recommendations. Latam communities has shown a particular affection for PoolTogether, in addition to being widely used by members, many started in crypto via this protocol. It was also very positive to show the results of the grant received through the partner fund. We hope that Pooltogether will continue to insert users to crypto and especially to Optimism.
Overnight: For
Following DeFi C committee recommendations. In cycle # 7 our community had voted against, and then Overnight team made the expected changes and in this cycle it was voted in favor.
Socket: For
Following Tooling committee recommendations. In cycle # 6 our community had voted against, then Socket team made the expected changes and in this cycle it was voted in favor.
EthernautDAO: For
Following Tooling committee recommendations. Without a doubt, EthernautDAO adds a lot of value to the Optimism ecosystem. Glad to know that some members of our community have been mentored by EthernautDAO and have provided positive feedback of it. In addition, the change made in the proposal has been seen as positive. Thanks to @Gonna.eth who has been on some of our governance calls, sharing his opinion with our community.
Tally Ho: Against
Although it was voted against, the recommendation of the tooling committee was considered for this decision.
Ambire Wallet: Against
Same situation as Tally Ho.
Messari: Abstain
Following Tooling committee recommendations. Our entire community knows the product and Messari’s reputation, however we consider that it is being offered a “service” and not a “proposal” along with the Optimism ecosystem. We also believe that it should be dealt with by other governance processes.
Defillama: For
Following Tooling committee recommendations. All members of our community voted in favor of this proposal. We know the work of the team and we use the tools provided by Defilllama on a daily basis.
Agora: For
Following the recommendation of the Tooling committee. The community believes that Agora’s value proposition is different from other governance tools. We await the development of the protocol to be tested by our community.
Mochi: Against
Our community voted against the tooling committee’s recommendation. We have voted for governance tools with proposals similar to Mochi’s, we want to see the impact of these tools on the ecosystem before approving this proposal.
Velodrome: Abstain
Since there was no recommendation from the DeFi A committee, there was a lot of discussion about this proposal in our community. Velodrome is one of the most used protocols by members due to the incentives given. Which led to the question if Velodromo is sustainable without the incentives, there was no consensus among the members. The importance of the Velodrome team for the expansion of the Optimism ecosystem was also highlighted. Points for and points against were touched. Our members did not reach a general consensus, so we voted to abstain.
Some notes about our presence at LABITCONF
With great joy, our members of DeFi LATAM community, Optimism Español, Layer 2 en Español, Mujeres en Cripto and Builders came together to have a presence all day in a booth during the LABITCONF event held on November 10 and 11 in Buenos Aires where + 5000 people attended during the 2 days.
@NicoProducto (leader of Optimism Español) gave a talk on the governance of Optimism in front of + 200 people.
twitter.com
DeFi LATAM ?? 1
@DeFi_LATAM
Gm frens!?
Hoy los esperamos nuevamente en @labitconf ?
?️ 14 . 30 Entendiendo el paradigma modular by @ 0 xJoxes @Layer 2 es
?️ 16 . 30 Cómo gestionar una gobernanza by @nicoproducto de @OptimismESP
Acercate a nuestro stand a conocernos, matear y charlar entre amigos ? https://t.co/x 0 DcjGOXHi
11 : 18 AM - 12 Nov 2022
26
2
twitter.com
Optimism Español ?✨️
@OptimismESP
¡GM Optimistas ?✨!
Gracias por haberse acercado a la charla brindada por @nicoproducto, donde habló de nuestra participación en la gobernanza de @optimismFND ?.
Esperamos, se hayan llevado muchos aprendizajes y muchas ganas de participar en gobernanza ?. https://t.co/TaPszExzKJ
4 : 04 PM - 13 Nov 2022
17
5
A special thanks to @CryptoChica and @NicoProducto who managed and organized so that Optimism Español could be present at LABITCONF.
Conclusion
Between events where we present Optimism and season 2 , it has been an intense few months and a lot of work for our community. However, our team was up to the situation and we were not only able to have a presence in all the presentations, but we also fulfilled our tasks within governance in a timely manner.
In the next few weeks we will be uploading our thoughts on the season 2 wrap up, season 3 start and the Council Grant.
Hi again!
We’re always posting our procedures and activities, so this monday 11 / 7 we had our 7…
Hi again!
We’re always posting our procedures and activities, so this monday 11 / 7 we had our 7 th Governance Call in DeFi LATAM in collaboration with Optimism Español to discuss the proposals of last voting cycle (# 8 ). We continue to share our experiences as delegates and part of the governance committees in this season 2 . This call was one of the longest we had and with a lot of debate about the proposals. We also had the pleasure of having the delegate @olimpio in our discussion with the community.
Participants: + 18 attendees. Duration 3 hs. As always, many thanks to our contributor Pacha for the design of these POAP series.
Our voting procedure
Our procedure remains intact as the previous governance calls, we encourage our members interested in Optimism and its ecosystem to express their opinion and be an active part of the final decision-making, as a way to absorb the experience, criteria and preferences of all in one voice. During this round we were able to observe more participation/discussion from our community members.
As a result, our vote for cycle # 8 has been the following:
Alchemix: For
Following DeFi committee A recommendations. In the previous period Alchemix received important feedback and they moved forward by resubmitting the proposal. Our community saw the changes applied by the Alchemix team very positively
Arrakis Finance: Against
The three points considered by Committee A were well considered by our community. Also, the intentions of helping new illiquid projects on Uniswap V 3 are noble, but it is appropriate to give more details of this approach and avoid gambling incentives, or else start low to judge the results later. Happy to see an improvement to the proposition, as boosting Uniswap liquidity is a positive for the broader ecosystem, more often than not.
Symphony Finance: Against
Committee A showed two important points to correct and our community also agreed. The Latam community is convinced that Symphony adds value to the ecosystem, it’s popular among the members of our community. However, a more focused proposal is expected.
Homora V 2 x Ironbank: Against
Our community voted against the recommendation of the Defi C committee. The reasons are those expressed by several governance delegates, HomoraV 2 in close source and the biggest beneficiary of the proposal is Iron Bank. Homora is a protocol used by members of our community, some members also collaborate with their community.
Angle Protocol: For
Following DeFi C committee recommendations, forex currencies like agEUR are a space worth boosting for asset diversity in the Optimism ecosystem. Also, Angle’s track record is respectable so far, which is why our community leaned towards this proposal.
InsureDAO: For
Following DeFi C committee recommendations. The insurance protocols aren’t widely used among members of the community or ecosystem in general, for various reasons such as their lack of efficiency in a good fit to the DeFi ecosystem and complexity of understanding, but organic growth demonstrated so far, the coverage of a large number of protocols within Optimism and the KPIs proposed by the team, were essential for the decision made by the community.
Curve: For
Following DeFi C committee recommendations. Curve is one of the most popular protocols among the members of our community, not only because of the incentives generated in Ethereum and other chains, but also because of its solid history without vulnerabilities and great developers teams that have behind. We expect to see the same traction on Optimism.
Pool together: For
Following DeFi C committee recommendations. Latam communities has shown a particular affection for PoolTogether, in addition to being widely used by members, many started in crypto via this protocol. It was also very positive to show the results of the grant received through the partner fund. We hope that Pooltogether will continue to insert users to crypto and especially to Optimism.
Overnight: For
Following DeFi C committee recommendations. In cycle # 7 our community had voted against, and then Overnight team made the expected changes and in this cycle it was voted in favor.
Socket: For
Following Tooling committee recommendations. In cycle # 6 our community had voted against, then Socket team made the expected changes and in this cycle it was voted in favor.
EthernautDAO: For
Following Tooling committee recommendations. Without a doubt, EthernautDAO adds a lot of value to the Optimism ecosystem. Glad to know that some members of our community have been mentored by EthernautDAO and have provided positive feedback of it. In addition, the change made in the proposal has been seen as positive. Thanks to @Gonna.eth who has been on some of our governance calls, sharing his opinion with our community.
Tally Ho: Against
Although it was voted against, the recommendation of the tooling committee was considered for this decision.
Ambire Wallet: Against
Same situation as Tally Ho.
Messari: Abstain
Following Tooling committee recommendations. Our entire community knows the product and Messari’s reputation, however we consider that it is being offered a “service” and not a “proposal” along with the Optimism ecosystem. We also believe that it should be dealt with by other governance processes.
Defillama: For
Following Tooling committee recommendations. All members of our community voted in favor of this proposal. We know the work of the team and we use the tools provided by Defilllama on a daily basis.
Agora: For
Following the recommendation of the Tooling committee. The community believes that Agora’s value proposition is different from other governance tools. We await the development of the protocol to be tested by our community.
Mochi: Against
Our community voted against the tooling committee’s recommendation. We have voted for governance tools with proposals similar to Mochi’s, we want to see the impact of these tools on the ecosystem before approving this proposal.
Velodrome: Abstain
Since there was no recommendation from the DeFi A committee, there was a lot of discussion about this proposal in our community. Velodrome is one of the most used protocols by members due to the incentives given. Which led to the question if Velodromo is sustainable without the incentives, there was no consensus among the members. The importance of the Velodrome team for the expansion of the Optimism ecosystem was also highlighted. Points for and points against were touched. Our members did not reach a general consensus, so we voted to abstain.
Some notes about our presence at LABITCONF
With great joy, our members of DeFi LATAM community, Optimism Español, Layer 2 en Español, Mujeres en Cripto and Builders came together to have a presence all day in a booth during the LABITCONF event held on November 10 and 11 in Buenos Aires where + 5000 people attended during the 2 days.
@NicoProducto (leader of Optimism Español) gave a talk on the governance of Optimism in front of + 200 people.
twitter.com
DeFi LATAM ??
@DeFi_LATAM
Gm frens!?
Hoy los esperamos nuevamente en @labitconf ?
?️ 14 . 30 Entendiendo el paradigma modular by @ 0 xJoxes @Layer 2 es
?️ 16 . 30 Cómo gestionar una gobernanza by @nicoproducto de @OptimismESP
Acercate a nuestro stand a conocernos, matear y charlar entre amigos ? https://t.co/x 0 DcjGOXHi
11 : 18 AM - 12 Nov 2022
26
2
twitter.com
Optimism Español ?✨️
@OptimismESP
¡GM Optimistas ?✨!
Gracias por haberse acercado a la charla brindada por @nicoproducto, donde habló de nuestra participación en la gobernanza de @optimismFND ?.
Esperamos, se hayan llevado muchos aprendizajes y muchas ganas de participar en gobernanza ?. https://t.co/TaPszExzKJ
4 : 04 PM - 13 Nov 2022
17
5
A special thanks to @CryptoChica and @NicoProducto who managed and organized so that Optimism Español could be present at LABITCONF.
Conclusion
Between events where we present Optimism and season 2 , it has been an intense few months and a lot of work for our community. However, our team was up to the situation and we were not only able to have a presence in all the presentations, but we also fulfilled our tasks within governance in a timely manner.
In the next few weeks we will be uploading our thoughts on the season 2 wrap up, season 3 start and the Council Grant.
Hi again! We’re always posting our procedures and activities, so this monday 11 / 7 we had our 7…
Hi again! We’re always posting our procedures and activities, so this monday 11 / 7 we had our 7 th Governance Call in DeFi LATAM in collaboration with Optimism Español to discuss the proposals of last voting cycle (# 8 ). We continue to share our experiences as delegates and part of the governance committees in this season 2 . This call was one of the longest we had and with a lot of debate about the proposals. We also had the pleasure of having the delegate @olimpio in our discussion with the community. Participants: + 18 2 attendees. Duration 3 hs. As always, many thanks to our contributor Pacha for the design of these POAP series. Our voting procedure Our procedure remains intact as the previous governance calls, we encourage our members interested in Optimism and its ecosystem to express their opinion and be an active part of the final decision-making, as a way to absorb the experience, criteria and preferences of all in one voice. During this round we were able to observe more participation/discussion from our community members. As a result, our vote for cycle # 8 has been the following: Alchemix: For Following DeFi committee A recommendations. In the previous period Alchemix received important feedback and they moved forward by resubmitting the proposal. Our community saw the changes applied by the Alchemix team very positively Arrakis Finance: Against The three points considered by Committee A were well considered by our community. Also, the intentions of helping new illiquid projects on Uniswap V 3 are noble, but it is appropriate to give more details of this approach and avoid gambling incentives, or else start low to judge the results later. Happy to see an improvement to the proposition, as boosting Uniswap liquidity is a positive for the broader ecosystem, more often than not. Symphony Finance: Against Committee A showed two important points to correct and our community also agreed. The Latam community is convinced that Symphony adds value to the ecosystem, it’s popular among the members of our community. However, a more focused proposal is expected. Homora V 2 x Ironbank: Against Our community voted against the recommendation of the Defi C committee. The reasons are those expressed by several governance delegates, HomoraV 2 in close source and the biggest beneficiary of the proposal is Iron Bank. Homora is a protocol used by members of our community, some members also collaborate with their community. Angle Protocol: For Following DeFi C committee recommendations, forex currencies like agEUR are a space worth boosting for asset diversity in the Optimism ecosystem. Also, Angle’s track record is respectable so far, which is why our community leaned towards this proposal. InsureDAO: For Following DeFi C committee recommendations. The insurance protocols aren’t widely used among members of the community or ecosystem in general, for various reasons such as their lack of efficiency in a good fit to the DeFi ecosystem and complexity of understanding, but organic growth demonstrated so far, the coverage of a large number of protocols within Optimism and the KPIs proposed by the team, were essential for the decision made by the community. Curve: For Following DeFi C committee recommendations. Curve is one of the most popular protocols among the members of our community, not only because of the incentives generated in Ethereum and other chains, but also because of its solid history without vulnerabilities and great developers teams that have behind. We expect to see the same traction on Optimism. Pool together: For Following DeFi C committee recommendations. Latam communities has shown a particular affection for PoolTogether, in addition to being widely used by members, many started in crypto via this protocol. It was also very positive to show the results of the grant received through the partner fund. We hope that Pooltogether will continue to insert users to crypto and especially to Optimism. Overnight: For Following DeFi C committee recommendations. In cycle # 7 our community had voted against, and then Overnight team made the expected changes and in this cycle it was voted in favor. Socket: For Following Tooling committee recommendations. In cycle # 6 our community had voted against, then Socket team made the expected changes and in this cycle it was voted in favor. EthernautDAO: For Following Tooling committee recommendations. Without a doubt, EthernautDAO adds a lot of value to the Optimism ecosystem. Glad to know that some members of our community have been mentored by EthernautDAO and have provided positive feedback of it. In addition, the change made in the proposal has been seen as positive. Thanks to @Gonna.eth who has been on some of our governance calls, sharing his opinion with our community. Tally Ho: Against Although it was voted against, the recommendation of the tooling committee was considered for this decision. Ambire Wallet: Against Same situation as Tally Ho. Messari: Abstain Following Tooling committee recommendations. Our entire community knows the product and Messari’s reputation, however we consider that it is being offered a “service” and not a “proposal” along with the Optimism ecosystem. We also believe that it should be dealt with by other governance processes. Defillama: For Following Tooling committee recommendations. All members of our community voted in favor of this proposal. We know the work of the team and we use the tools provided by Defilllama on a daily basis. Agora: For Following the recommendation of the Tooling committee. The community believes that Agora’s value proposition is different from other governance tools. We await the development of the protocol to be tested by our community. Mochi: Against Our community voted against the tooling committee’s recommendation. We have voted for governance tools with proposals similar to Mochi’s, we want to see the impact of these tools on the ecosystem before approving this proposal. Velodrome: Abstain Since there was no recommendation from the DeFi A committee, there was a lot of discussion about this proposal in our community. Velodrome is one of the most used protocols by members due to the incentives given. Which led to the question if Velodromo is sustainable without the incentives, there was no consensus among the members. The importance of the Velodrome team for the expansion of the Optimism ecosystem was also highlighted. Points for and points against were touched. Our members did not reach a general consensus, so we voted to abstain. Some notes about our presence at LABITCONF With great joy, our members of DeFi LATAM community, Optimism Español, Layer 2 en Español, Mujeres en Cripto and Builders came together to have a presence all day in a booth during the LABITCONF event held on November 10 and 11 in Buenos Aires where + 5000 people attended during the 2 days. @NicoProducto (leader of Optimism Español) gave a talk on the governance of Optimism in front of + 200 people. twitter.com DeFi LATAM ?? 1 @DeFi_LATAM Gm frens!? Hoy los esperamos nuevamente en @labitconf ? ?️ 14 . 30 Entendiendo el paradigma modular by @ 0 xJoxes @Layer 2 es ?️ 16 . 30 Cómo gestionar una gobernanza by @nicoproducto de @OptimismESP Acercate a nuestro stand a conocernos, matear y charlar entre amigos ? https://t.co/x 0 DcjGOXHi 11 : 18 AM - 12 Nov 2022 26 2 twitter.com Optimism Español ?✨️ @OptimismESP ¡GM Optimistas ?✨! Gracias por haberse acercado a la charla brindada por @nicoproducto, donde habló de nuestra participación en la gobernanza de @optimismFND ?. Esperamos, se hayan llevado muchos aprendizajes y muchas ganas de participar en gobernanza ?. https://t.co/TaPszExzKJ 4 : 04 PM - 13 Nov 2022 17 5 A special thanks to @CryptoChica and @NicoProducto who managed and organized so that Optimism Español could be present at LABITCONF. Conclusion Between events where we present Optimism and season 2 , it has been an intense few months and a lot of work for our community. However, our team was up to the situation and we were not only able to have a presence in all the presentations, but we also fulfilled our tasks within governance in a timely manner. In the next few weeks we will be uploading our thoughts on the season 2 wrap up, season 3 start and the Council Grant.
Season 2 has come to an end! and with this we write here our thoughts of community and participan…
Season 2 has come to an end! and with this we write here our thoughts of community and participants for the DeFi LATAM delegation for this governance.
Introduction
First of all we want to clarify that this doesn’t represent isolated individual thoughts, but also a compilation of thoughts from members interested in the Optimism governance from our DeFi LATAM community delegation, as is described in our commitment as delegates.
Very important say that this includes the thoughts of our work team to make possible our labours in DeFi C committee and the Tooling committee. Our contributors: @Netrim, @AxlVaz and @Jadmat.
Next we are going to express positives, negatives and other thoughts that we learned from season 2 .
Internal work in DeFi LATAM
As we expressed in our participation in the two committees, as a team we managed to carry out our work in a timely manner. As a team of 4 , the division of labor for each of the proposals in the queue according to the corresponding committee, based on the expertise, knowledge, and context of each proposal and the team behind it, was correct. Then these discussions ended internally among our team, supporting our independent line of thought. Happily we were able to gain experience in a shared way.
Positive
More minds, better ideas.
The determination of tasks and responsibilities for each one facilitated the development and delivery of reasoning in an orderly and formal manner, ready for discussion.
Each member worked on the proposals where they liked to focus the most and with the greatest motivation.
Participation in the forum was remarkably active as a group and individually.
Negative
Coordination work is not easily achieved in the early stages.
Workflow between committees
We are one of the few delegations that formally work as a group, which implies that coordination for the rest of the fellow committee members must be well managed. In this sense, we need to issue a special thanks to the committee leaders @OPUser and @krzkaczor because we are happy with the trust received, as well as the rest of the members. We learned a lot in the process and we hope that you all have also felt comfortable with our participation.
Positive
Good relationship between the members of the committees from the beginning and motivations to do what is right at all times in our internal work.
The discussions about the evaluation of the proposals in themselves and according to the expertise of each member were learning for all.
Consensus was reached in relativegood way and was never a reason for division.
Negative
Communication is not always optimal.
The lack of availability caused delays in some parts of the process, so it did not fit well with the timing of the governance processes.
Impact on season 2
Committees contributed at first to lighten the workload of the delegates to evaluate the proposals, but they quickly became a cause rather than a discouragement for the participation in the forum by delegates not involved in some form of committee, mainly. On the other hand, the presence of these committees as a “trusted source of consultation” for governance generated more friction and sometimes personal discussions that lost focus or turned the environment into a hostile one, for example, when some proposals were rejected.
Seen from the outside, the committees failed on several occasions in their communicative role of being up to date, accompanying the proposals until their evaluation. From our side, we are proud that the reports issued by our committees had a comprehensive and even sophisticated analysis for the understanding of all parties.
Positive
Iterative governance generated interesting discussions regarding the scope of the Committees that are reflected in Season 3 , with the Council of Grants.
Helped show which delegates were really involved, even if they were not part of any committees.
Negative
There was a dispersion of information between Discord and the Forum, making it difficult to follow the thread of certain conversations.
Moderation in the Forum was non-existent.
Too many backchannels and/or private communications, there was no open communication from the committees in general.
Final thoughts and conclusions
Organization in governance is not easy, even more so when we’re just starting out for a protocol of such prominence as Optimism itself. As a result, following governance is not an easy task and we need to revisit how to align incentives so that contributing participants are rewarded in some way.
Forum discussions are desirable but we note the need for a more moderated environment to stay on topic, fueled earlier by challenged action by committees, but surely in the future by action by the Grants Council.
We want to note that since Phase 0 significant sums of OP tokens have been delivered to numerous projects, it’s time to thoroughly analyze the current impact and assess KPIs where appropriate, or have protocols report performance.
On our side, our commitment to this governance remains the same as the first day and we remain committed to the Optimism ecosystem. We are going to continue working with our community and the entire ecosystem to continue representing Latam within this governance.
Stay Optimistic!
Special thanks to rest of our committee team members @lefterisjp @ScaleWeb 3 @cryptotesters @Gonna…
Special thanks to rest of our committee team members @lefterisjp @ScaleWeb 3 @cryptotesters @Gonna.eth @ceresstation @MinimalGravitas
Season 2 has come to an end! and with this we write here our thoughts of community and participan…
Season 2 has come to an end! and with this we write here our thoughts of community and participants for the DeFi LATAM delegation for this governance. Introduction First of all we want to clarify that this doesn’t represent isolated individual thoughts, but also a compilation of thoughts from members interested in the Optimism governance from our DeFi LATAM community delegation, as is described in our commitment as delegates. Very important say that this includes the thoughts of our work team to make possible our labours in DeFi C committee and the Tooling committee. Our contributors: @Netrim, @AxlVaz and @Jadmat. Next we are going to express positives, negatives and other thoughts that we learned from season 2 . Internal work in DeFi LATAM As we expressed in our participation in the two committees, as a team we managed to carry out our work in a timely manner. As a team of 4 , the division of labor for each of the proposals in the queue according to the corresponding committee, based on the expertise, knowledge, and context of each proposal and the team behind it, was correct. Then these discussions ended internally among our team, supporting our independent line of thought. Happily we were able to gain experience in a shared way. Positive More minds, better ideas. The determination of tasks and responsibilities for each one facilitated the development and delivery of reasoning in an orderly and formal manner, ready for discussion. Each member worked on the proposals where they liked to focus the most and with the greatest motivation. Participation in the forum was remarkably active as a group and individually. Negative Coordination work is not easily achieved in the early stages. Workflow between committees We are one of the few delegations that formally work as a group, which implies that coordination for the rest of the fellow committee members must be well managed. In this sense, we need to issue a special thanks to the committee leaders @OPUser and @krzkaczor because we are happy with the trust received, as well as the rest of the members. We learned a lot in the process and we hope that you all have also felt comfortable with our participation. Positive Good relationship between the members of the committees from the beginning and motivations to do what is right at all times in our internal work. The discussions about the evaluation of the proposals in themselves and according to the expertise of each member were learning for all. Consensus was reached in relativegood way and was never a reason for division. Negative Communication is not always optimal. The lack of availability caused delays in some parts of the process, so it did not fit well with the timing of the governance processes. Impact on season 2 Committees contributed at first to lighten the workload of the delegates to evaluate the proposals, but they quickly became a cause rather than a discouragement for the participation in the forum by delegates not involved in some form of committee, mainly. On the other hand, the presence of these committees as a “trusted source of consultation” for governance generated more friction and sometimes personal discussions that lost focus or turned the environment into a hostile one, for example, when some proposals were rejected. Seen from the outside, the committees failed on several occasions in their communicative role of being up to date, accompanying the proposals until their evaluation. From our side, we are proud that the reports issued by our committees had a comprehensive and even sophisticated analysis for the understanding of all parties. Positive Iterative governance generated interesting discussions regarding the scope of the Committees that are reflected in Season 3 , with the Council of Grants. Helped show which delegates were really involved, even if they were not part of any committees. Negative There was a dispersion of information between Discord and the Forum, making it difficult to follow the thread of certain conversations. Moderation in the Forum was non-existent. Too many backchannels and/or private communications, there was no open communication from the committees in general. Final thoughts and conclusions Organization in governance is not easy, even more so when we’re just starting out for a protocol of such prominence as Optimism itself. As a result, following governance is not an easy task and we need to revisit how to align incentives so that contributing participants are rewarded in some way. Forum discussions are desirable but we note the need for a more moderated environment to stay on topic, fueled earlier by challenged action by committees, but surely in the future by action by the Grants Council. We want to note that since Phase 0 significant sums of OP tokens have been delivered to numerous projects, it’s time to thoroughly analyze the current impact and assess KPIs where appropriate, or have protocols report performance. On our side, our commitment to this governance remains the same as the first day and we remain committed to the Optimism ecosystem. We are going to continue working with our community and the entire ecosystem to continue representing Latam within this governance. Stay Optimistic!
Special thanks to rest of our committee team members @lefterisjp @ScaleWeb 3 @cryptotesters @Gonna…
Special thanks to rest of our committee team members @lefterisjp @ScaleWeb 3 @cryptotesters @Gonna.eth @ceresstation @MinimalGravitas
In the context of upcoming Season 3 , we’re issuing our first thoughts about these new process and…
In the context of upcoming Season 3 , we’re issuing our first thoughts about these new process and proposals and its impact to the governance. Read below:
Re: [DRAFT PROPOSAL]: Moving to a Grants Council
Re: [DRAFT PROPOSAL]: Protocol Delegation Program
In the context of upcoming Season 3 , we’re issuing our first thoughts about these new process and…
In the context of upcoming Season 3 , we’re issuing our first thoughts about these new process and proposals and its impact to the governance. Read below:
Re: [DRAFT PROPOSAL]: Moving to a Grants Council 3
Re: [DRAFT PROPOSAL]: Protocol Delegation Program 1
In the context of upcoming Season 3 , we’re issuing our first thoughts about these new process and…
In the context of upcoming Season 3 , we’re issuing our first thoughts about these new process and proposals and its impact to the governance. Read below: Re: [DRAFT PROPOSAL]: Moving to a Grants Council 3 Re: [DRAFT PROPOSAL]: Protocol Delegation Program 1
Hi again!
The year 2022 is about to end, and this week we have decided to make our last governanc…
Hi again!
The year 2022 is about to end, and this week we have decided to make our last governance call for the rest of the year, discussing our pending decisions, always in collaboration with Optimism Español, specifically to discuss the proposals of this last voting cycle (# 9 a) and sharing other important topics.
Participants: + 33 1 attendees. Duration: 2 hs.
Our voting procedure
Sticking to our way of making decisions, we explain to the community the current status of active proposals. Then, we carry out the respective votes with the following results:
Grant Council: For
The feeling from us (as delegate + contributors) and the rest of the community is that a twist is needed to cover the gaps that the committees couldn’t fill last season. This new iteration looks reasonable, but it’s a big change for delegates to focus on now; if this proposal passes.
Protocol delegation program: Against
Despite several of us and contributors expressing about various positive aspects of this proposal 1 , in the final consensus with our community there were more doubts or questions about the purpose of the proposal, such as, for example, if there is not a clearer path to where we should go, how to guide protocol representatives to pursue the interest of the network and not a shock of conflicting interests.
About our committee and retroactive compensation
As everyone can note, this delegation received a total sum of 16695 OP. In terms of contribution received by each delegate, joxes.defilatam.eth is positioned as the Top 1 delegation in funds received, which makes us feel proud of all the effort made. In details, the rewards have been received for the following reasons:
Participation in DeFi Committee C: 4043 OP - 24 %
Participation in Tooling Committee: 4652 OP - 28 %
Season 1 and 2 retroactive delegate rewards: 8000 OP - 48 %
As we know, this delegation has worked together since its inception through Joxes (me), our group of contributors and Latam community, accompanied by an initiative started from DeFi LATAM called Optimism Español. In order to honor the efforts of our community, we have decided to distribute said funds to everyone involved in the community to participate in governance and support Optimism in its own growth and future:
Committee Contributors: who shared the responsibility of carrying out the work in both committees for season 2 . Joxes, @Netrim @AxlVaz and @Jadmat – 7200 OP.
Optimism Español: to support the group of contributors who helped this initiative in any meaningful way. @NicoProducto, @et_ 2244 , Pacha, @CryptoChica, Candu 1 , Lu 2 , @eriksuazo, Gasm and @ahhsun – 4700 OP.
SEED Latam: an allocation for the next initiative to insert people from the web 3 ecosystem of latam in governance – 2295 OP.
Community Airdrop: a distribution to those who frequently participated in our governance calls and contributed to governance discussion and decision-making, counted by POAPs, excluding the contributors listed above – 2000 OP. More details will be shared in the next few days.
1600 × 891 372 KB
Call for optimism
We love working as a collective intelligence and transparency, something that makes us feel identified with the ethos of the Optimism ecosystem. If we want Optimism to be the transformative engine of Ethereum and the future of the internet, we must start iterating ourselves as best we can. So far, we’re all very proud of what we’re doing to encourage the rest of the Optimism community to appreciate these efforts, and we invite other delegates to refine their own participation processes, if applicable.
For now, we are preparing for Season 3 , Citizen House release and RetroPGF 2 to continue contributing to public goods and Ethereum ecosystem.
Hi again!
The year 2022 is about to end, and this week we have decided to make our last governanc…
Hi again!
The year 2022 is about to end, and this week we have decided to make our last governance call for the rest of the year, discussing our pending decisions, always in collaboration with Optimism Español, specifically to discuss the proposals of this last voting cycle (# 9 a) and sharing other important topics.
Participants: + 33 attendees. Duration: 2 hs.
Our voting procedure
Sticking to our way of making decisions, we explain to the community the current status of active proposals. Then, we carry out the respective votes with the following results:
Grant Council: For
The feeling from us (as delegate + contributors) and the rest of the community is that a twist is needed to cover the gaps that the committees couldn’t fill last season. This new iteration looks reasonable, but it’s a big change for delegates to focus on now; if this proposal passes.
Protocol delegation program: Against
Despite several of us and contributors expressing about various positive aspects of this proposal, in the final consensus with our community there were more doubts or questions about the purpose of the proposal, such as, for example, if there is not a clearer path to where we should go, how to guide protocol representatives to pursue the interest of the network and not a shock of conflicting interests.
About our committee and retroactive compensation
As everyone can note, this delegation received a total sum of 16695 OP. In terms of contribution received by each delegate, joxes.defilatam.eth is positioned as the Top 1 delegation in funds received, which makes us feel proud of all the effort made. In details, the rewards have been received for the following reasons:
Participation in DeFi Committee C: 4043 OP - 24 %
Participation in Tooling Committee: 4652 OP - 28 %
Season 1 and 2 retroactive delegate rewards: 8000 OP - 48 %
As we know, this delegation has worked together since its inception through Joxes (me), our group of contributors and Latam community, accompanied by an initiative started from DeFi LATAM called Optimism Español. In order to honor the efforts of our community, we have decided to distribute said funds to everyone involved in the community to participate in governance and support Optimism in its own growth and future:
Committee Contributors: who shared the responsibility of carrying out the work in both committees for season 2 . Joxes, @Netrim @AxlVaz and @Jadmat – 7200 OP.
Optimism Español: to support the group of contributors who helped this initiative in any meaningful way. @NicoProducto, @et_ 2244 , Pacha, @CryptoChica, Candu, Lu, @eriksuazo, Gasm and @ahhsun – 4700 OP.
SEED Latam: an allocation for the next initiative to insert people from the web 3 ecosystem of latam in governance – 2295 OP.
Community Airdrop: a distribution to those who frequently participated in our governance calls and contributed to governance discussion and decision-making, counted by POAPs, excluding the contributors listed above – 2000 OP. More details will be shared in the next few days.
1600 × 891 372 KB
Call for optimism
We love working as a collective intelligence and transparency, something that makes us feel identified with the ethos of the Optimism ecosystem. If we want Optimism to be the transformative engine of Ethereum and the future of the internet, we must start iterating ourselves as best we can. So far, we’re all very proud of what we’re doing to encourage the rest of the Optimism community to appreciate these efforts, and we invite other delegates to refine their own participation processes, if applicable.
For now, we are preparing for Season 3 , Citizen House release and RetroPGF 2 to continue contributing to public goods and Ethereum ecosystem.
Hi again! The year 2022 is about to end, and this week we have decided to make our last governanc…
Hi again! The year 2022 is about to end, and this week we have decided to make our last governance call for the rest of the year, discussing our pending decisions, always in collaboration with Optimism Español, specifically to discuss the proposals of this last voting cycle (# 9 a) and sharing other important topics. Participants: + 33 1 attendees. Duration: 2 hs. Our voting procedure Sticking to our way of making decisions, we explain to the community the current status of active proposals. Then, we carry out the respective votes with the following results: Grant Council: For The feeling from us (as delegate + contributors) and the rest of the community is that a twist is needed to cover the gaps that the committees couldn’t fill last season. This new iteration looks reasonable, but it’s a big change for delegates to focus on now; if this proposal passes. Protocol delegation program: Against Despite several of us and contributors expressing about various positive aspects of this proposal 1 , in the final consensus with our community there were more doubts or questions about the purpose of the proposal, such as, for example, if there is not a clearer path to where we should go, how to guide protocol representatives to pursue the interest of the network and not a shock of conflicting interests. About our committee and retroactive compensation As everyone can note, this delegation received a total sum of 16695 OP. In terms of contribution received by each delegate, joxes.defilatam.eth is positioned as the Top 1 delegation in funds received, which makes us feel proud of all the effort made. In details, the rewards have been received for the following reasons: Participation in DeFi Committee C: 4043 OP - 24 % Participation in Tooling Committee: 4652 OP - 28 % Season 1 and 2 retroactive delegate rewards: 8000 OP - 48 % As we know, this delegation has worked together since its inception through Joxes (me), our group of contributors and Latam community, accompanied by an initiative started from DeFi LATAM called Optimism Español. In order to honor the efforts of our community, we have decided to distribute said funds to everyone involved in the community to participate in governance and support Optimism in its own growth and future: Committee Contributors: who shared the responsibility of carrying out the work in both committees for season 2 . Joxes, @Netrim @AxlVaz and @Jadmat – 7200 OP. Optimism Español: to support the group of contributors who helped this initiative in any meaningful way. @NicoProducto, @et_ 2244 , Pacha, @CryptoChica, Candu 1 , Lu 2 , @eriksuazo, Gasm and @ahhsun – 4700 OP. SEED Latam: an allocation for the next initiative to insert people from the web 3 ecosystem of latam in governance – 2295 OP. Community Airdrop: a distribution to those who frequently participated in our governance calls and contributed to governance discussion and decision-making, counted by POAPs, excluding the contributors listed above – 2000 OP. More details will be shared in the next few days. 1600 × 891 372 KB Call for optimism We love working as a collective intelligence and transparency, something that makes us feel identified with the ethos of the Optimism ecosystem. If we want Optimism to be the transformative engine of Ethereum and the future of the internet, we must start iterating ourselves as best we can. So far, we’re all very proud of what we’re doing to encourage the rest of the Optimism community to appreciate these efforts, and we invite other delegates to refine their own participation processes, if applicable. For now, we are preparing for Season 3 , Citizen House release and RetroPGF 2 to continue contributing to public goods and Ethereum ecosystem.
Sharing my thoughts on the citizen house and public goods
Finally the Citizen House has been announ…
Sharing my thoughts on the citizen house and public goods
Finally the Citizen House has been announced for its first iteration 2 . As we know, since its inception it has been thought to focus on the idea of funding public goods, as a way to potentially contribute to the future of the internet and free software, where Optimism and Ethereum are immersed.
As a second iteration of RPGF, the amount allocated by the foundation has been 10 m OP ($ 9 m today), and it will be focused on Optimism and its new release OP Stack, although it would be desirable if it’s also accompanied by Public Goods built for Ethereum base layer. Anyways, it’s also understandable that starting with public goods that help Optimism itself and not beyond is easier to align incentives and take note of lessons learned before being ambitious and later broading scope.
LATAM and public goods for Ethereum
In this part of the so-called “third world”, the Internet has always remained relatively distant or under the radar of a good part of Western and Eastern capitalism, mainly in finance. Coupled with our political and economic particulars, it explains why free software initiatives have been relevant, and most notably, Ethereum.
The role of Latin America for the Ethereum ecosystem has been important, as it happens in other regions. Despite the average low income, the masterminds have been at the start, in the formation of by example OpenZeppelin, MakerDAO, Hardhat, Flashbots, Decentraland and many other projects, not to make a long list. Different generations of builders have been contributing to the ecosystem and the different Ethereum communities in this region have accompanied and nurtured to impact Ethereum for good, including DeFi LATAM, with a remarkable degree of sophistication, recognized by Vitalik 3 .
Funding in Latin America is not easy to find, but fortunately the region has had access to these new mechanisms to build public goods such as having its own category in the Gitcoin Grants rounds, and Quadratic Funding in recent times such as:
Ethereum TGU Grants ( 12444 USD)
EthLatam BA ( 25000 USD)
EthColombia ( 292300 USD)
More than sixty projects have benefited, including open source contributions, communities and projects that try to solve problems in Latin America. In the process, many members of the ecosystem here have gained enormous experience on how to understand the proposed objectives, the selection process, voting, and how to improve it for future rounds. Our community members have been voters, applicants and even developers of some of these.
There are several members of the Ethereum ecosystem in our region that I think could also contribute to the process in a significant way with direct experience in said rounds (in the same order) such as crisgarner.eth 1 , @CryptoChica and juandav.eth 3 ; but also others like Mariano Conti, @Gonna.eth and @NicoProducto. My suggestion is that if any badge holder (elected by OF or by snapshot) wishes to nominate a person with a focus on this geographic location, my suggestion is on these persons.
The values of this delegation and a wish list
I must thank @kaereste for nominating this delegation (and @lefterisjp for keeping an eye out that we had a nomination), very excited by this. Elected or not, I will be looking closely at all infrastructure proposals with some priority as it is the key before building novel things on top of any form of Optimism.
Again, the objectives of this RPGF are clear: to help Optimism and its OP Stack in their degree of sophistication as a competitive framework that developers prefer to use over others. Some interesting things to see are communication between OP chains, consensus mechanisms for them, new L 2 clients of Optimism and focused on being the most optimized possible, infrastructure to enable other data availability schemes, VMs and innovative fraud proof systems, and of course, true education initiatives without value extraction to attract more developers and users to Optimism. Additionally, if any initiative is also matchable for the development of the Ethereum base layer in some way, it would be considered as a plus and not to be ignored.
Lastly, although it’s not detailed yet, we expect Citizen House to have their own chat channels open prior to the launch of RPGF 2 , including allowing them to iterate the process if there’s anything worth tweaking prior to the round. Excited for what’s to come!
Happy Citizen House!
Sharing my thoughts on the citizen house and public goods
Finally the Citizen House has been announ…
Sharing my thoughts on the citizen house and public goods
Finally the Citizen House has been announced for its first iteration. As we know, since its inception it has been thought to focus on the idea of funding public goods, as a way to potentially contribute to the future of the internet and free software, where Optimism and Ethereum are immersed.
As a second iteration of RPGF, the amount allocated by the foundation has been 10 m OP ($ 9 m today), and it will be focused on Optimism and its new release OP Stack, although it would be desirable if it’s also accompanied by Public Goods built for Ethereum base layer. Anyways, it’s also understandable that starting with public goods that help Optimism itself and not beyond is easier to align incentives and take note of lessons learned before being ambitious and later broading scope.
LATAM and public goods for Ethereum
In this part of the so-called “third world”, the Internet has always remained relatively distant or under the radar of a good part of Western and Eastern capitalism, mainly in finance. Coupled with our political and economic particulars, it explains why free software initiatives have been relevant, and most notably, Ethereum.
The role of Latin America for the Ethereum ecosystem has been important, as it happens in other regions. Despite the average low income, the masterminds have been at the start, in the formation of by example OpenZeppelin, MakerDAO, Hardhat, Flashbots, Decentraland and many other projects, not to make a long list. Different generations of builders have been contributing to the ecosystem and the different Ethereum communities in this region have accompanied and nurtured to impact Ethereum for good, including DeFi LATAM, with a remarkable degree of sophistication, recognized by Vitalik.
Funding in Latin America is not easy to find, but fortunately the region has had access to these new mechanisms to build public goods such as having its own category in the Gitcoin Grants rounds, and Quadratic Funding in recent times such as:
Ethereum TGU Grants ( 12444 USD)
EthLatam BA ( 25000 USD)
EthColombia ( 292300 USD)
More than sixty projects have benefited, including open source contributions, communities and projects that try to solve problems in Latin America. In the process, many members of the ecosystem here have gained enormous experience on how to understand the proposed objectives, the selection process, voting, and how to improve it for future rounds. Our community members have been voters, applicants and even developers of some of these.
There are several members of the Ethereum ecosystem in our region that I think could also contribute to the process in a significant way with direct experience in said rounds (in the same order) such as crisgarner.eth, @CryptoChica and juandav.eth; but also others like Mariano Conti, @Gonna.eth and @NicoProducto. My suggestion is that if any badge holder (elected by OF or by snapshot) wishes to nominate a person with a focus on this geographic location, my suggestion is on these persons.
The values of this delegation and a wish list
I must thank @kaereste for nominating this delegation (and @lefterisjp for keeping an eye out that we had a nomination), very excited by this. Elected or not, I will be looking closely at all infrastructure proposals with some priority as it is the key before building novel things on top of any form of Optimism.
Again, the objectives of this RPGF are clear: to help Optimism and its OP Stack in their degree of sophistication as a competitive framework that developers prefer to use over others. Some interesting things to see are communication between OP chains, consensus mechanisms for them, new L 2 clients of Optimism and focused on being the most optimized possible, infrastructure to enable other data availability schemes, VMs and innovative fraud proof systems, and of course, true education initiatives without value extraction to attract more developers and users to Optimism. Additionally, if any initiative is also matchable for the development of the Ethereum base layer in some way, it would be considered as a plus and not to be ignored.
Lastly, although it’s not detailed yet, we expect Citizen House to have their own chat channels open prior to the launch of RPGF 2 , including allowing them to iterate the process if there’s anything worth tweaking prior to the round. Excited for what’s to come!
Happy Citizen House!
Sharing my thoughts on the citizen house and public goods Finally the Citizen House has been announ…
Sharing my thoughts on the citizen house and public goods Finally the Citizen House has been announced for its first iteration 2 . As we know, since its inception it has been thought to focus on the idea of funding public goods, as a way to potentially contribute to the future of the internet and free software, where Optimism and Ethereum are immersed. As a second iteration of RPGF, the amount allocated by the foundation has been 10 m OP ($ 9 m today), and it will be focused on Optimism and its new release OP Stack, although it would be desirable if it’s also accompanied by Public Goods built for Ethereum base layer. Anyways, it’s also understandable that starting with public goods that help Optimism itself and not beyond is easier to align incentives and take note of lessons learned before being ambitious and later broading scope. LATAM and public goods for Ethereum In this part of the so-called “third world”, the Internet has always remained relatively distant or under the radar of a good part of Western and Eastern capitalism, mainly in finance. Coupled with our political and economic particulars, it explains why free software initiatives have been relevant, and most notably, Ethereum. The role of Latin America for the Ethereum ecosystem has been important, as it happens in other regions. Despite the average low income, the masterminds have been at the start, in the formation of by example OpenZeppelin, MakerDAO, Hardhat, Flashbots, Decentraland and many other projects, not to make a long list. Different generations of builders have been contributing to the ecosystem and the different Ethereum communities in this region have accompanied and nurtured to impact Ethereum for good, including DeFi LATAM, with a remarkable degree of sophistication, recognized by Vitalik 3 . Funding in Latin America is not easy to find, but fortunately the region has had access to these new mechanisms to build public goods such as having its own category in the Gitcoin Grants rounds, and Quadratic Funding in recent times such as: Ethereum TGU Grants ( 12444 USD) EthLatam BA ( 25000 USD) EthColombia ( 292300 USD) More than sixty projects have benefited, including open source contributions, communities and projects that try to solve problems in Latin America. In the process, many members of the ecosystem here have gained enormous experience on how to understand the proposed objectives, the selection process, voting, and how to improve it for future rounds. Our community members have been voters, applicants and even developers of some of these. There are several members of the Ethereum ecosystem in our region that I think could also contribute to the process in a significant way with direct experience in said rounds (in the same order) such as crisgarner.eth 1 , @CryptoChica and juandav.eth 2 ; but also others like Mariano Conti, @Gonna.eth and @NicoProducto. My suggestion is that if any badge holder (elected by OF or by snapshot) wishes to nominate a person with a focus on this geographic location, my suggestion is on these persons. The values of this delegation and a wish list I must thank @kaereste for nominating this delegation (and @lefterisjp for keeping an eye out that we had a nomination), very excited by this. Elected or not, I will be looking closely at all infrastructure proposals with some priority as it is the key before building novel things on top of any form of Optimism. Again, the objectives of this RPGF are clear: to help Optimism and its OP Stack in their degree of sophistication as a competitive framework that developers prefer to use over others. Some interesting things to see are communication between OP chains, consensus mechanisms for them, new L 2 clients of Optimism and focused on being the most optimized possible, infrastructure to enable other data availability schemes, VMs and innovative fraud proof systems, and of course, true education initiatives without value extraction to attract more developers and users to Optimism. Additionally, if any initiative is also matchable for the development of the Ethereum base layer in some way, it would be considered as a plus and not to be ignored. Lastly, although it’s not detailed yet, we expect Citizen House to have their own chat channels open prior to the launch of RPGF 2 , including allowing them to iterate the process if there’s anything worth tweaking prior to the round. Excited for what’s to come! Happy Citizen House!
About Badgeholder Nomination Voting
A total of 19 delegates were nominated to be part of Citizen …
About Badgeholder Nomination Voting
A total of 19 delegates were nominated to be part of Citizen House for this second iteration of RPGF. Regarding the voting decision, I have decided this time to receive an opinion from our main contributors about who could be the 10 most suitable for this round. It’s definitely not an easy task because all the nominees have demonstrated commitment to Optimism ecosystem and governance, and experience in public goods.
As a result, the following people who we have voted for and who we believe can truly contribute to this next iteration are: Linda Xie, Bobbay (vía Stablenode), Lefteris, OPUser, Polynya, Scott Moore, Dhannte, Minimal Gravitas, Kris Kraczor and Jack Anorak.
About Badgeholder Nomination Voting A total of 19 delegates were nominated to be part of Citizen …
About Badgeholder Nomination Voting A total of 19 delegates were nominated to be part of Citizen House for this second iteration of RPGF. Regarding the voting decision, I have decided this time to receive an opinion from our main contributors about who could be the 10 most suitable for this round. It’s definitely not an easy task because all the nominees have demonstrated commitment to Optimism ecosystem and governance, and experience in public goods. As a result, the following people who we have voted for and who we believe can truly contribute to this next iteration are: Linda Xie, Bobbay (vía Stablenode), Lefteris, OPUser, Polynya, Scott Moore, Dhannte, Minimal Gravitas, Kris Kraczor and Jack Anorak.
As promised, we have decided to distribute a total of 2 , 000 OP tokens to our participants in go…
As promised, we have decided to distribute a total of 2 , 000 OP tokens to our participants in governance calls throughout the year, being our first community airdrop. This was never intended until the announcement of the retractive rewards for Season 1 and 2 . As a result, it allowed us to do a very simple fair distribution among those who listened and discussed our decision making for Optimism.
The rules were: have claimed at least 2 POAPs from our governance calls (out of a total of 8 editions).
A total of 35 eligible, under the following distribution and by number of addresses:
8 POAPs = 120 OP ( 2 )
7 POAPs = 95 OP ( 3 )
6 POAPs = 85 OP ( 2 )
5 POAPs = 75 OP ( 3 )
4 POAPs = 60 OP ( 1 )
3 POAPs = 50 OP ( 6 )
2 POAPs = 40 OP ( 18 )
*This excludes all 13 contributors between DeFi LATAM and Optimism Español.
These distributions and others can be followed watching my ENS, being also our delegation address (joxes.eth or joxes.defilatam.eth).
twitter.com
DeFi LATAM ??
@DeFi_LATAM
Amigos ? Nos complace anunciar que en #DeFiLATAM acabamos de distribuir el primer Airdrop comunitario ? $OP @OptimismFND
2000 tokens a repartir entre más de 30 elegibles ??
Pero antes ? Recap de nuestro año en @OptimismGov ?
?? https://t.co/ 7 d 2 xw 77 naI
5 : 07 PM - 22 Dec 2022
55
13
Optimistic Holidays!
As promised, we have decided to distribute a total of 2 , 000 OP tokens to our participants in go…
As promised, we have decided to distribute a total of 2 , 000 OP tokens to our participants in governance calls throughout the year, being our first community airdrop. This was never intended until the announcement of the retractive rewards for Season 1 and 2 . As a result, it allowed us to do a very simple fair distribution among those who listened and discussed our decision making for Optimism. The rules were: have claimed at least 2 POAPs from our governance calls (out of a total of 8 editions). A total of 35 eligible, under the following distribution and by number of addresses: 8 POAPs = 120 OP ( 2 ) 7 POAPs = 95 OP ( 3 ) 6 POAPs = 85 OP ( 2 ) 5 POAPs = 75 OP ( 3 ) 4 POAPs = 60 OP ( 1 ) 3 POAPs = 50 OP ( 6 ) 2 POAPs = 40 OP ( 18 ) *This excludes all 13 contributors between DeFi LATAM and Optimism Español. These distributions and others can be followed watching my ENS, being also our delegation address (joxes.eth or joxes.defilatam.eth). twitter.com DeFi LATAM ?? @DeFi_LATAM Amigos ? Nos complace anunciar que en #DeFiLATAM acabamos de distribuir el primer Airdrop comunitario ? $OP @OptimismFND 2000 tokens a repartir entre más de 30 elegibles ?? Pero antes ? Recap de nuestro año en @OptimismGov ? ?? https://t.co/ 7 d 2 xw 77 naI 5 : 07 PM - 22 Dec 2022 55 13 Optimistic Holidays!
ICYMI – we’re postulating to Grants Council for Season 3 in Growth Experiment Sub Committee. An i…
ICYMI – we’re postulating to Grants Council for Season 3 in Growth Experiment Sub Committee. An interesting thing, we’re proposing participate as a group, with Joxes (me) as leader and responsible to the vacant, but working as a group composed by 4 contributors.
Read our entire proposal here: Grant Council Reviewer Nominations - # 7 by DeFi_LATAM_Joxes 5
ICYMI – we’re postulating to Grants Council for Season 3 in Growth Experiment Sub Committee. An i…
ICYMI – we’re postulating to Grants Council for Season 3 in Growth Experiment Sub Committee. An interesting thing, we’re proposing participate as a group, with Joxes (me) as leader and responsible to the vacant, but working as a group composed by 4 contributors.
Read our entire proposal here: Grant Council Reviewer Nominations - # 7 by DeFi_LATAM_Joxes
ICYMI – we’re postulating to Grants Council for Season 3 in Growth Experiment Sub Committee. An i…
ICYMI – we’re postulating to Grants Council for Season 3 in Growth Experiment Sub Committee. An interesting thing, we’re proposing participate as a group, with Joxes (me) as leader and responsible to the vacant, but working as a group composed by 4 contributors. Read our entire proposal here: Grant Council Reviewer Nominations - # 7 by DeFi_LATAM_Joxes 5
And, yes! Happy new year 2023 ! :tada:
The last year we have publishing all our activities, and th…
And, yes! Happy new year 2023 ! :tada:
The last year we have publishing all our activities, and this year we’re keep doing the same and making things better. So, this Monday 01 / 16 we had our 9 th Governance Call in DeFi LATAM in collaboration with Optimism Español to discuss the proposals of this special # 9 b voting cycle.
As a reminder, we continue to improve internally the way our contributors and rest of our community reach consensus on decision making within the Optimism Collective.
Participants: + 40 3 attendees. Duration 1 hs 40 min. As always, many thanks to our contributor Pacha for the design of these POAP series.
Our voting procedure and rational
Our evaluation was shared among the contributors and then taken to the community to reach a consensus among the enthusiasts of the OP ecosystem.
Protocol Delegation Elections
We have decided to vote for the following 8 protocols as most voted:
ENS
BeethovenX & Balancer
Connext
Paraswap
Li. Fi
QiDao Protocol
Revert
2 Pi Network
These are a mix of protocols of which the community in some way reflects a preference regarding usability, appreciation or recognized builders behind it.
Grants Council Elections - Growth Experiments
After a great debate about some considerations, mainly because our application to this council sub-committee, we have decided to vote 5 of most properly candidates:
@fig: his contributions to the ecosystem and expertise were well valued as The Optimist Score 1 , as well as his trajectory.
@Bobbay_StableLab: their good level of participation and experience as a group (StableNode) and working with other protocols/DAOs. Bobbay has reproduced this for Optimism governance.
@GFXlabs: in the same line, this group has been in DeFi with a large experience in DAOs and helping to build and grow protocols.
@katie: good commitment and highly recognized in the space for her contributions. Expertise is also well known.
Joxes | DeFi LATAM: we’re generally against voting for ourselves (even before code of coduct was established), leaving the rest of governance to faithfully express their preferences for us, as by example in committee and badger holders elections. In this case OP foundation allowed the applicant delegates to vote for themselves as long as we chose 4 others and the community agreed to take this step. It should be noted that some of our contributors didn’t fully agree with this.
Grants Council Elections - Builders
Regarding Builders, the community followed up with a good debate to choose the best 3 candidates, resulting in voting for:
@Gonna.eth: several community members acknowledge Gonna.eth (Dhannte) and their work on EthernautDAO, we believe that he is ideal for this work.
@kaereste: seems as a natural fit for this work also, well recognized in the community for his work on L 2 beat.
@jackanorak and @OPUser: there was a technical tie for 3 rd place. We see in Jack as likely to strongly contribute in this council based on expertise in protocols and analytics, demonstrated here in governance. In the other hand, we worked with OPUser in DeFi C committee and continues to maintain a longstanding dedication to governance, vision, and product. Without a clear consensus, we voted for both.
Final thoughts
Season 3 will be quite different than previous iterations of Optimism governance. Council will occupy efforts that will no longer be the direct responsibility of the full set of OP delegates as was the case last year.With the new approach for grants, let’s see how the new council and foundation can improve the system of delivery of funds to reduce the waste of resources and increase the impact with short periods of time to guarantee the growth of the Optimism ecosystem.
Optimistic optimism!
And, yes! Happy new year 2023 ! :tada:
The last year we have publishing all our activities, and th…
And, yes! Happy new year 2023 ! :tada:
The last year we have publishing all our activities, and this year we’re keep doing the same and making things better. So, this Monday 01 / 16 we had our 9 th Governance Call in DeFi LATAM in collaboration with Optimism Español to discuss the proposals of this special # 9 b voting cycle.
As a reminder, we continue to improve internally the way our contributors and rest of our community reach consensus on decision making within the Optimism Collective.
Participants: + 40 attendees. Duration 1 hs 40 min. As always, many thanks to our contributor Pacha for the design of these POAP series.
Our voting procedure and rational
Our evaluation was shared among the contributors and then taken to the community to reach a consensus among the enthusiasts of the OP ecosystem.
Protocol Delegation Elections
We have decided to vote for the following 8 protocols as most voted:
ENS
BeethovenX & Balancer
Connext
Paraswap
Li. Fi
QiDao Protocol
Revert
2 Pi Network
These are a mix of protocols of which the community in some way reflects a preference regarding usability, appreciation or recognized builders behind it.
Grants Council Elections - Growth Experiments
After a great debate about some considerations, mainly because our application to this council sub-committee, we have decided to vote 5 of most properly candidates:
@fig: his contributions to the ecosystem and expertise were well valued as The Optimist Score, as well as his trajectory.
@Bobbay_StableLab: their good level of participation and experience as a group (StableNode) and working with other protocols/DAOs. Bobbay has reproduced this for Optimism governance.
@GFXlabs: in the same line, this group has been in DeFi with a large experience in DAOs and helping to build and grow protocols.
@katie: good commitment and highly recognized in the space for her contributions. Expertise is also well known.
Joxes | DeFi LATAM: we’re generally against voting for ourselves (even before code of coduct was established), leaving the rest of governance to faithfully express their preferences for us, as by example in committee and badger holders elections. In this case OP foundation allowed the applicant delegates to vote for themselves as long as we chose 4 others and the community agreed to take this step. It should be noted that some of our contributors didn’t fully agree with this.
Grants Council Elections - Builders
Regarding Builders, the community followed up with a good debate to choose the best 3 candidates, resulting in voting for:
@Gonna.eth: several community members acknowledge Gonna.eth (Dhannte) and their work on EthernautDAO, we believe that he is ideal for this work.
@kaereste: seems as a natural fit for this work also, well recognized in the community for his work on L 2 beat.
@jackanorak and @OPUser: there was a technical tie for 3 rd place. We see in Jack as likely to strongly contribute in this council based on expertise in protocols and analytics, demonstrated here in governance. In the other hand, we worked with OPUser in DeFi C committee and continues to maintain a longstanding dedication to governance, vision, and product. Without a clear consensus, we voted for both.
Final thoughts
Season 3 will be quite different than previous iterations of Optimism governance. Council will occupy efforts that will no longer be the direct responsibility of the full set of OP delegates as was the case last year.With the new approach for grants, let’s see how the new council and foundation can improve the system of delivery of funds to reduce the waste of resources and increase the impact with short periods of time to guarantee the growth of the Optimism ecosystem.
Optimistic optimism!
And, yes! Happy new year 2023 ! :tada: The last year we have publishing all our activities, and th…
And, yes! Happy new year 2023 ! :tada: The last year we have publishing all our activities, and this year we’re keep doing the same and making things better. So, this Monday 01 / 16 we had our 9 th Governance Call in DeFi LATAM in collaboration with Optimism Español to discuss the proposals of this special # 9 b voting cycle. As a reminder, we continue to improve internally the way our contributors and rest of our community reach consensus on decision making within the Optimism Collective. Participants: + 40 3 attendees. Duration 1 hs 40 min. As always, many thanks to our contributor Pacha for the design of these POAP series. Our voting procedure and rational Our evaluation was shared among the contributors and then taken to the community to reach a consensus among the enthusiasts of the OP ecosystem. Protocol Delegation Elections We have decided to vote for the following 8 protocols as most voted: ENS BeethovenX & Balancer Connext Paraswap Li. Fi QiDao Protocol Revert 2 Pi Network These are a mix of protocols of which the community in some way reflects a preference regarding usability, appreciation or recognized builders behind it. Grants Council Elections - Growth Experiments After a great debate about some considerations, mainly because our application to this council sub-committee, we have decided to vote 5 of most properly candidates: @fig: his contributions to the ecosystem and expertise were well valued as The Optimist Score 1 , as well as his trajectory. @Bobbay_StableLab: their good level of participation and experience as a group (StableNode) and working with other protocols/DAOs. Bobbay has reproduced this for Optimism governance. @GFXlabs: in the same line, this group has been in DeFi with a large experience in DAOs and helping to build and grow protocols. @katie: good commitment and highly recognized in the space for her contributions. Expertise is also well known. Joxes | DeFi LATAM: we’re generally against voting for ourselves (even before code of coduct was established), leaving the rest of governance to faithfully express their preferences for us, as by example in committee and badger holders elections. In this case OP foundation allowed the applicant delegates to vote for themselves as long as we chose 4 others and the community agreed to take this step. It should be noted that some of our contributors didn’t fully agree with this. Grants Council Elections - Builders Regarding Builders, the community followed up with a good debate to choose the best 3 candidates, resulting in voting for: @Gonna.eth: several community members acknowledge Gonna.eth (Dhannte) and their work on EthernautDAO, we believe that he is ideal for this work. @kaereste: seems as a natural fit for this work also, well recognized in the community for his work on L 2 beat. @jackanorak and @OPUser: there was a technical tie for 3 rd place. We see in Jack as likely to strongly contribute in this council based on expertise in protocols and analytics, demonstrated here in governance. In the other hand, we worked with OPUser in DeFi C committee and continues to maintain a longstanding dedication to governance, vision, and product. Without a clear consensus, we voted for both. Final thoughts Season 3 will be quite different than previous iterations of Optimism governance. Council will occupy efforts that will no longer be the direct responsibility of the full set of OP delegates as was the case last year.With the new approach for grants, let’s see how the new council and foundation can improve the system of delivery of funds to reduce the waste of resources and increase the impact with short periods of time to guarantee the growth of the Optimism ecosystem. Optimistic optimism!
Hello all!
This March 17 th we held our 10 th Governance Call in Discord 2 to discuss about the…
Hello all!
This March 17 th we held our 10 th Governance Call in Discord 2 to discuss about the RPGF 2 , the process and voting approach in community.
Participants: + 30 attendees ( 32 1 :medal_military:collected; special thanks again to Pacha for the design).
Duration: 1 hs 53 min.
Recap
In this occasion we meet to discuss everything about the RPGF 2 and from the participation of SEEDLatam through joxes.eth as bagdeholder. To do this, we cover the following topics:
What is RPGF
Current scope of RPGF 2
Experience of the onboarding and process as bagdeholder
How is the voting process
Reviewing some projects
How to vote in the SEEDLatam poll
We were fortunate to have team members with Spanish-speaking members such as Proof of Integrity, web 3 beach, ETH México, Bankless DAO & Academy, WakeUp Labs, etc. We reviewed their applications, what they are doing and questions were answered. Very positive discussion.
We launched our snapshot page to experiment with community decision-making. Our snapshot page here 1 .
In this occasion, we decided to grant the decision to allocate 20 % of the voting power as bagdeholder for RPGF 2 in the hands of the community. You can check all the details in our voting rationale below. Please read.
RetroPGF Round 2 Voting Rationale ? RetroPGF
Hi governance and community members.
Voting ended a few days ago and I don’t want to pass up the opportunity to share here what we did at SEEDLatam, as me as bagdeholder, delegate representative for the community.
As you may know, our delegation is iterative and in different instances, the community has some say over our votes for Optimism governance, and this time was no different. In RPGF 2 , we allow the community to help us decide which projects to fund.
The scope
For this round, we focus…
We hope that our experience is useful for the collective and we look forward to see the results and what we learned in this round with the rest of the bagdeholders.
Happy Retro!
Hello all! This March 17 th we held our 10 th Governance Call in Discord 2 to discuss about the…
Hello all! This March 17 th we held our 10 th Governance Call in Discord 2 to discuss about the RPGF 2 , the process and voting approach in community. Participants: + 30 attendees ( 32 :medal_military:collected; special thanks again to Pacha for the design). Duration: 1 hs 53 min. Recap In this occasion we meet to discuss everything about the RPGF 2 and from the participation of SEEDLatam through joxes.eth as bagdeholder. To do this, we cover the following topics: What is RPGF Current scope of RPGF 2 Experience of the onboarding and process as bagdeholder How is the voting process Reviewing some projects How to vote in the SEEDLatam poll We were fortunate to have team members with Spanish-speaking members such as Proof of Integrity, web 3 beach, ETH México, Bankless DAO & Academy, WakeUp Labs, etc. We reviewed their applications, what they are doing and questions were answered. Very positive discussion. We launched our snapshot page to experiment with community decision-making. Our snapshot page here 1 . In this occasion, we decided to grant the decision to allocate 20 % of the voting power as bagdeholder for RPGF 2 in the hands of the community. You can check all the details in our voting rationale below. Please read. RetroPGF Round 2 Voting Rationale ? RetroPGF Hi governance and community members. Voting ended a few days ago and I don’t want to pass up the opportunity to share here what we did at SEEDLatam, as me as bagdeholder, delegate representative for the community. As you may know, our delegation is iterative and in different instances, the community has some say over our votes for Optimism governance, and this time was no different. In RPGF 2 , we allow the community to help us decide which projects to fund. The scope For this round, we focus… We hope that our experience is useful for the collective and we look forward to see the results and what we learned in this round with the rest of the bagdeholders. Happy Retro!
Hello OP users!
This April 4 th we held our 11 th Governance Call in Discord 1 to discuss abou…
Hello OP users!
This April 4 th we held our 11 th Governance Call in Discord 1 to discuss about proposals in this cycle 11 1 , related to Bedrock and FractalVisions suspension proposals.
Participants: + 50 attendees ( 49 1 :medal_military:collected; special thanks again to Pacha for the design).
Duration: 1 hs 26 min.
Voting procedure
As usual, we conducted a 1 person 1 vote procedure with the participants of the governance call. The discussion about it in both proposals was fruitful and there was a lot of debate, mainly in the suspension of FractalVisions. Consensus is reached with the option preferred by the majority.
Results and rationale
Below our decisions and rational. Please read our post published in each related thread.
Upgrade Proposal: Bedrock v 2 - YES
[FINAL] Upgrade # 1 : Bedrock Protocol Upgrade - v 2 Protocol Upgrade
At SEED Latam, we hosted our 11 th OP Governance Call, and we decide to vote YES for the Bedrock upgrade proposal.
Rationale: After proposal v 1 was canceled due to security issues found, we agree that once patched and booted into testnet, we agree to move forward. We acknowledge Bedrock’s role prior to other future features and implementations such as Superchain and Fault proof systems (Cannon). We just require that the update be early enough in terms of communication so that the community can b…
Delegate Suspension: Fractal Visions - YES
Delegate Suspension: Fractal Visions ?Other Proposals
At SEED Latam, we hosted our 11 th OP Governance Call, and we decide to vote YES for the Fractal Vision suspension as delegate.
During the call, our collaborators and community members expressed our opinion on the case. We can include it in the following points:
First, intentional and deliberate doxxing is BAD even in the circumstances in which this case is presented. We agree that the code of conduct applies.
Second, the foundation should look for the means so that the decision can be mad…
Bedrock is coming!
Hello OP users! This April 4 th we held our 11 th Governance Call in Discord 1 to discuss abou…
Hello OP users! This April 4 th we held our 11 th Governance Call in Discord 1 to discuss about proposals in this cycle 11 1 , related to Bedrock and FractalVisions suspension proposals. Participants: + 50 attendees ( 49 1 :medal_military:collected; special thanks again to Pacha for the design). Duration: 1 hs 26 min. Voting procedure As usual, we conducted a 1 person 1 vote procedure with the participants of the governance call. The discussion about it in both proposals was fruitful and there was a lot of debate, mainly in the suspension of FractalVisions. Consensus is reached with the option preferred by the majority. Results and rationale Below our decisions and rational. Please read our post published in each related thread. Upgrade Proposal: Bedrock v 2 - YES [FINAL] Upgrade # 1 : Bedrock Protocol Upgrade - v 2 Protocol Upgrade At SEED Latam, we hosted our 11 th OP Governance Call, and we decide to vote YES for the Bedrock upgrade proposal. Rationale: After proposal v 1 was canceled due to security issues found, we agree that once patched and booted into testnet, we agree to move forward. We acknowledge Bedrock’s role prior to other future features and implementations such as Superchain and Fault proof systems (Cannon). We just require that the update be early enough in terms of communication so that the community can b… Delegate Suspension: Fractal Visions - YES Delegate Suspension: Fractal Visions ?Other Proposals At SEED Latam, we hosted our 11 th OP Governance Call, and we decide to vote YES for the Fractal Vision suspension as delegate. During the call, our collaborators and community members expressed our opinion on the case. We can include it in the following points: First, intentional and deliberate doxxing is BAD even in the circumstances in which this case is presented. We agree that the code of conduct applies. Second, the foundation should look for the means so that the decision can be mad… Bedrock is coming!
Hi all! :red_circle:
Season 4 is coming up and we have spent time reviewing the possible governan…
Hi all! :red_circle:
Season 4 is coming up and we have spent time reviewing the possible governance changes and giving our first impressions from the internal team of this SEED LATAM delegation.
Summary and inspiring words
Guide to Season 4 : As a Collective ? Token House Governance
Our first wave of feedback
Hi community and governance members, from our side we are excited about this clear change in methodology for Season 4 to cover different objectives and ensure that they are met with a more thorough system. Iterating on the governance of Optimism has always been a priority, and we agree that this is one way we can make this upcoming season different. We are moving towards an “optimistic” future but we also stress the efforts to make governance as horizontal as possible …
About the Collective Intents
[OLD] Collective Intents: Season 4 ? Token House Governance
After reading the Collective Intents initiative, we want to provide our first feedback on the four proposed items, and share some first thoughts:
Intent 1
This is one of the most interesting and necessary paths for Optimism to mature as a protocol. It seems to us that it is going in the right direction, we recognize that the path to the completion of the development of Optimism has to take place sooner rather than later and open the option for the community to contribute, honoring the ethos th…
About Token House Missions
Token House Missions ARCHIVED Mission Proposals
Pretty excited about this one. We believe that it is the natural step after some intense seasons past in the distribution of funds to different initiatives, which have fulfilled their mission (others not so much) and that it is time to iterate on something different. Having the foundation propose missions is a good first step; however, we believe that the missions of the foundation must have a feedback stage with the governance to improve their scope.
About alliances and reputation
We understa…
:date: We’re going to make our next governance call this coming Monday, May 1 at 9 pm UTC in our SEED LATAM discord 1 . If you understand/can speak spanish and want to participate in the discussion about everything that is coming up for Season 4 , we are open to discuss and share ideas together. Open invitation to all. More about the details and formal announcement of this governance call soon.
Hi all! :red_circle: Season 4 is coming up and we have spent time reviewing the possible governan…
Hi all! :red_circle: Season 4 is coming up and we have spent time reviewing the possible governance changes and giving our first impressions from the internal team of this SEED LATAM delegation. Summary and inspiring words Guide to Season 4 : As a Collective ? Token House Governance Our first wave of feedback Hi community and governance members, from our side we are excited about this clear change in methodology for Season 4 to cover different objectives and ensure that they are met with a more thorough system. Iterating on the governance of Optimism has always been a priority, and we agree that this is one way we can make this upcoming season different. We are moving towards an “optimistic” future but we also stress the efforts to make governance as horizontal as possible … About the Collective Intents [OLD] Collective Intents: Season 4 ? Token House Governance After reading the Collective Intents initiative, we want to provide our first feedback on the four proposed items, and share some first thoughts: Intent 1 This is one of the most interesting and necessary paths for Optimism to mature as a protocol. It seems to us that it is going in the right direction, we recognize that the path to the completion of the development of Optimism has to take place sooner rather than later and open the option for the community to contribute, honoring the ethos th… About Token House Missions Token House Missions ARCHIVED Mission Proposals Pretty excited about this one. We believe that it is the natural step after some intense seasons past in the distribution of funds to different initiatives, which have fulfilled their mission (others not so much) and that it is time to iterate on something different. Having the foundation propose missions is a good first step; however, we believe that the missions of the foundation must have a feedback stage with the governance to improve their scope. About alliances and reputation We understa… :date: We’re going to make our next governance call this coming Monday, May 1 at 9 pm UTC in our SEED LATAM discord 1 . If you understand/can speak spanish and want to participate in the discussion about everything that is coming up for Season 4 , we are open to discuss and share ideas together. Open invitation to all. More about the details and formal announcement of this governance call soon.
Hello OP users!
This May 1 st we held our 12 th Governance Call in Discord in collaboration with…
Hello OP users!
This May 1 st we held our 12 th Governance Call in Discord in collaboration with Optimism Español to discuss about proposals in this cycle 12 1 , all of these related to the upcoming season 4 .
Participants: + 50 attendees ( 48 1 :medal_military:collected; special thanks again to Pacha for the design).
Duration: 1 hs 34 min.
Voting procedure
We had the opportunity to welcome @Pumbi as a new member of the Optimism Español team, who helped us with a review about the upcoming Season 4 . As usual, Joxes as a delegate expressed his views regarding this new scope for governance, and we conducted a 1 person 1 vote procedure with the participants of the governance call.
Results and rationale
Our initial opinions were published in the last post. Please read our post published in each related thread. This was retified by the community members, so the decision made has been:
Intent # 1 Budget Proposal: Yes
Intent # 2 Budget Proposal: Yes
Intent # 3 Budget Proposal: Yes
Intent # 4 Budget Proposal: Yes
Protocol Delegation Program Renewal: Yes
For season 4 , we have also ratified our participation as a group, with @Joxes as the leader and our three contributors from season 1 and 2 : @AxlVaz @Netrim and @Jadmat.
Yes! Bedrock is coming! :red_circle: :tada:
SEEDGov: Hello, Joxes. This is a test. New profile here! Trying not to get our account suspended
We will soon publish a recap of this first year of participation in Optimism Governance.
SEEDGov: Last week we celebrated the first anniversary of Delegate Joxes’ platform in Optimism’s governance!
A year ago, Joxes brought this platform to life and assumed its leadership with the support of the community. During this time, we have been dedicated to contributing to the growth of Optimism in Latin America, and we are proud of the achievements made.
https://twitter.com/SEEDLatam/status/1660785678462902274/photo/1
Our journey has been filled with valuable lessons and rewarding experiences.
Let’s take a moment to recollect:
It all started with the launch of Optimism’s governance and our introduction in the delegate commitment.
From the start, on the platform, we aimed to improve governance organization through efficient processes, clear workflows, and effective communication.
First season
We dedicated our efforts to enhancing governance, working on process dating and strengthening communication among members. Our proposals and discussions in the governance threads reflect our commitment and dedication in this regard.
The first governance call took place on July 6th. It was an exciting moment where we had the opportunity to connect with other community members and share our ideas and perspectives on the future of Optimism.
Second season
We joined the Tooling & Infrastructure and DeFi C committees, where we reviewed funding proposals for projects aimed at fueling the Optimism ecosystem. Throughout the months of September, October, and November, we worked diligently on these tasks with the goal of supporting the growth and development of the platform.
We achieved a significant milestone in December by receiving 16,695 OP tokens as recognition for our work in Optimism’s governance!
We distributed these tokens among our collaborators and the community. It was a retroactive airdrop to reward those who attended the calls. This milestone not only showcases the transparency but also the importance we place on active participation and collaboration.
https://twitter.com/SEEDLatam/status/1605973257219211264/photo/1
Moreover, Joxes was chosen by the governance as a badgeholder in the RPGF2, also nominating another distinguished member of the Latin American community, CryptoChica. This opportunity enabled us to actively engage in the allocation of 10 million OP tokens, thereby making a valuable contribution to the growth and fortification of Optimism.
The platform was created with the purpose of engaging in Optimism’s governance and giving voice to Latin America.
n response to the need for a close delegate who represents the interests of the region, we took on this commitment responsibly, guided by our core values of decentralization, transparency, and always prioritizing the users. Our main goal is to ensure the development of Optimism and contribute to the open-source ecosystem and public goods.
We are aware of the importance of participating in governance and embrace that role with a committed and active community. This hard work is reflected in:
12 governance calls
100% participation in formal proposals
18,945 received OP tokens
925 delegating addresses
Our delegate, Joxes, leads a team of three dedicated collaborators: Axlvaz, Netrim , and Jadmat. They work tirelessly to amplify the voice of the Latin American community within Optimism’s governance.
As we gaze into the future, we have ambitious goals for 2023. We aim to further strengthen Optimism’s governance, promote active community participation, and foster Ethereum adoption in the Latin American region.
Living the experience of participating in Optimism’s governance for a whole year gave us the background to embark on two more new governances. Thanks to each and every member of the forum!
Hello OP users! This May 1 st we held our 12 th Governance Call in Discord in collaboration with…
Hello OP users! This May 1 st we held our 12 th Governance Call in Discord in collaboration with Optimism Español to discuss about proposals in this cycle 12 1 , all of these related to the upcoming season 4 . Participants: + 50 attendees ( 48 1 :medal_military:collected; special thanks again to Pacha for the design). Duration: 1 hs 34 min. Voting procedure We had the opportunity to welcome @Pumbi as a new member of the Optimism Español team, who helped us with a review about the upcoming Season 4 . As usual, Joxes as a delegate expressed his views regarding this new scope for governance, and we conducted a 1 person 1 vote procedure with the participants of the governance call. Results and rationale Our initial opinions were published in the last post. Please read our post published in each related thread. This was retified by the community members, so the decision made has been: Intent # 1 Budget Proposal: Yes Intent # 2 Budget Proposal: Yes Intent # 3 Budget Proposal: Yes Intent # 4 Budget Proposal: Yes Protocol Delegation Program Renewal: Yes For season 4 , we have also ratified our participation as a group, with @Joxes as the leader and our three contributors from season 1 and 2 : @AxlVaz @Netrim and @Jadmat. Yes! Bedrock is coming! :red_circle: :tada:
seedlatam: Hello, Joxes. This is a test. New profile here! Trying not to get our account suspended
We will soon publish a recap of this first year of participation in Optimism Governance.
seedlatam: Last week we celebrated the first anniversary of Delegate Joxes’ platform in Optimism’s governance!
A year ago, Joxes brought this platform to life and assumed its leadership with the support of the community. During this time, we have been dedicated to contributing to the growth of Optimism in Latin America, and we are proud of the achievements made.
https://twitter.com/SEEDLatam/status/1660785678462902274/photo/1
Our journey has been filled with valuable lessons and rewarding experiences.
Let’s take a moment to recollect:
It all started with the launch of Optimism’s governance and our introduction in the delegate commitment.
From the start, on the platform, we aimed to improve governance organization through efficient processes, clear workflows, and effective communication.
First season
We dedicated our efforts to enhancing governance, working on process dating and strengthening communication among members. Our proposals and discussions in the governance threads reflect our commitment and dedication in this regard.
The first governance call took place on July 6th. It was an exciting moment where we had the opportunity to connect with other community members and share our ideas and perspectives on the future of Optimism.
Second season
We joined the Tooling & Infrastructure and DeFi C committees, where we reviewed funding proposals for projects aimed at fueling the Optimism ecosystem. Throughout the months of September, October, and November, we worked diligently on these tasks with the goal of supporting the growth and development of the platform.
We achieved a significant milestone in December by receiving 16,695 OP tokens as recognition for our work in Optimism’s governance!
We distributed these tokens among our collaborators and the community. It was a retroactive airdrop to reward those who attended the calls. This milestone not only showcases the transparency but also the importance we place on active participation and collaboration.
https://twitter.com/SEEDLatam/status/1605973257219211264/photo/1
Moreover, Joxes was chosen by the governance as a badgeholder in the RPGF2, also nominating another distinguished member of the Latin American community, CryptoChica. This opportunity enabled us to actively engage in the allocation of 10 million OP tokens, thereby making a valuable contribution to the growth and fortification of Optimism.
The platform was created with the purpose of engaging in Optimism’s governance and giving voice to Latin America.
n response to the need for a close delegate who represents the interests of the region, we took on this commitment responsibly, guided by our core values of decentralization, transparency, and always prioritizing the users. Our main goal is to ensure the development of Optimism and contribute to the open-source ecosystem and public goods.
We are aware of the importance of participating in governance and embrace that role with a committed and active community. This hard work is reflected in:
12 governance calls
100% participation in formal proposals
18,945 received OP tokens
925 delegating addresses
Our delegate, Joxes, leads a team of three dedicated collaborators: Axlvaz, Netrim , and Jadmat. They work tirelessly to amplify the voice of the Latin American community within Optimism’s governance.
As we gaze into the future, we have ambitious goals for 2023. We aim to further strengthen Optimism’s governance, promote active community participation, and foster Ethereum adoption in the Latin American region.
Living the experience of participating in Optimism’s governance for a whole year gave us the background to embark on two more new governances. Thanks to each and every member of the forum!
Hello, Joxes. This is a test. New profile here! Trying not to get our account suspended :slight_smi…
Hello, Joxes. This is a test. New profile here! Trying not to get our account suspended :slight_smile:
We will soon publish a recap of this first year of participation in Optimism Governance.
Last week we celebrated the first anniversary of Delegate Joxes’ platform in Optimism’s governance!…
Last week we celebrated the first anniversary of Delegate Joxes’ platform in Optimism’s governance!
A year ago, Joxes brought this platform to life and assumed its leadership with the support of the community. During this time, we have been dedicated to contributing to the growth of Optimism in Latin America, and we are proud of the achievements made.
https://twitter.com/SEEDLatam/status/ 1660785678462902274 /photo/ 1
Our journey has been filled with valuable lessons and rewarding experiences.
Let’s take a moment to recollect:
It all started with the launch of Optimism’s governance and our introduction in the delegate commitment.
From the start, on the platform, we aimed to improve governance organization through efficient processes, clear workflows, and effective communication.
First season
We dedicated our efforts to enhancing governance, working on process dating and strengthening communication among members. Our proposals and discussions in the governance threads reflect our commitment and dedication in this regard.
The first governance call took place on July 6 th. It was an exciting moment where we had the opportunity to connect with other community members and share our ideas and perspectives on the future of Optimism.
Second season
We joined the Tooling & Infrastructure and DeFi C committees, where we reviewed funding proposals for projects aimed at fueling the Optimism ecosystem. Throughout the months of September, October, and November, we worked diligently on these tasks with the goal of supporting the growth and development of the platform.
We achieved a significant milestone in December by receiving 16 , 695 OP tokens as recognition for our work in Optimism’s governance!
We distributed these tokens among our collaborators and the community. It was a retroactive airdrop to reward those who attended the calls. This milestone not only showcases the transparency but also the importance we place on active participation and collaboration.
https://twitter.com/SEEDLatam/status/ 1605973257219211264 /photo/ 1 1
Moreover, Joxes was chosen by the governance as a badgeholder in the RPGF 2 , also nominating another distinguished member of the Latin American community, CryptoChica. This opportunity enabled us to actively engage in the allocation of 10 million OP tokens, thereby making a valuable contribution to the growth and fortification of Optimism.
The platform was created with the purpose of engaging in Optimism’s governance and giving voice to Latin America.
n response to the need for a close delegate who represents the interests of the region, we took on this commitment responsibly, guided by our core values of decentralization, transparency, and always prioritizing the users. Our main goal is to ensure the development of Optimism and contribute to the open-source ecosystem and public goods.
We are aware of the importance of participating in governance and embrace that role with a committed and active community. This hard work is reflected in:
12 governance calls
100 % participation in formal proposals
18 , 945 received OP tokens
925 delegating addresses
Our delegate, Joxes, leads a team of three dedicated collaborators: Axlvaz, Netrim , and Jadmat. They work tirelessly to amplify the voice of the Latin American community within Optimism’s governance.
As we gaze into the future, we have ambitious goals for 2023 . We aim to further strengthen Optimism’s governance, promote active community participation, and foster Ethereum adoption in the Latin American region.
Living the experience of participating in Optimism’s governance for a whole year gave us the background to embark on two more new governances. Thanks to each and every member of the forum!
Hello, Joxes. This is a test. New profile here! Trying not to get our account suspended :slight_smi…
Hello, Joxes. This is a test. New profile here! Trying not to get our account suspended :slight_smile: We will soon publish a recap of this first year of participation in Optimism Governance.
Last week we celebrated the first anniversary of Delegate Joxes’ platform in Optimism’s governance!…
Last week we celebrated the first anniversary of Delegate Joxes’ platform in Optimism’s governance! A year ago, Joxes brought this platform to life and assumed its leadership with the support of the community. During this time, we have been dedicated to contributing to the growth of Optimism in Latin America, and we are proud of the achievements made. https://twitter.com/SEEDLatam/status/ 1660785678462902274 /photo/ 1 Our journey has been filled with valuable lessons and rewarding experiences. Let’s take a moment to recollect: It all started with the launch of Optimism’s governance and our introduction in the delegate commitment. From the start, on the platform, we aimed to improve governance organization through efficient processes, clear workflows, and effective communication. First season We dedicated our efforts to enhancing governance, working on process dating and strengthening communication among members. Our proposals and discussions in the governance threads reflect our commitment and dedication in this regard. The first governance call took place on July 6 th. It was an exciting moment where we had the opportunity to connect with other community members and share our ideas and perspectives on the future of Optimism. Second season We joined the Tooling & Infrastructure and DeFi C committees, where we reviewed funding proposals for projects aimed at fueling the Optimism ecosystem. Throughout the months of September, October, and November, we worked diligently on these tasks with the goal of supporting the growth and development of the platform. We achieved a significant milestone in December by receiving 16 , 695 OP tokens as recognition for our work in Optimism’s governance! We distributed these tokens among our collaborators and the community. It was a retroactive airdrop to reward those who attended the calls. This milestone not only showcases the transparency but also the importance we place on active participation and collaboration. https://twitter.com/SEEDLatam/status/ 1605973257219211264 /photo/ 1 1 Moreover, Joxes was chosen by the governance as a badgeholder in the RPGF 2 , also nominating another distinguished member of the Latin American community, CryptoChica. This opportunity enabled us to actively engage in the allocation of 10 million OP tokens, thereby making a valuable contribution to the growth and fortification of Optimism. The platform was created with the purpose of engaging in Optimism’s governance and giving voice to Latin America. n response to the need for a close delegate who represents the interests of the region, we took on this commitment responsibly, guided by our core values of decentralization, transparency, and always prioritizing the users. Our main goal is to ensure the development of Optimism and contribute to the open-source ecosystem and public goods. We are aware of the importance of participating in governance and embrace that role with a committed and active community. This hard work is reflected in: 12 governance calls 100 % participation in formal proposals 18 , 945 received OP tokens 925 delegating addresses Our delegate, Joxes, leads a team of three dedicated collaborators: Axlvaz, Netrim , and Jadmat. They work tirelessly to amplify the voice of the Latin American community within Optimism’s governance. As we gaze into the future, we have ambitious goals for 2023 . We aim to further strengthen Optimism’s governance, promote active community participation, and foster Ethereum adoption in the Latin American region. Living the experience of participating in Optimism’s governance for a whole year gave us the background to embark on two more new governances. Thanks to each and every member of the forum!
Hello all community members!
Le’ts recap some of our lastest activities:
13 th Governance Call
As…
Hello all community members!
Le’ts recap some of our lastest activities:
13 th Governance Call
As usual in our Discord channel 1 we held a new governance call to discus the voting cycle 12 b. This was the last round for the upcoming season 4 .
Participants: + 40 attendees ( 38 1 :medal_military:collected; special thanks again to Pacha for the design).
Duration: 1 hs 19 min.
Results
Inflation Adjustment Proposal: For
Treasury Appropriation (Foundation Year 2 Budget Approval): Against
Council Reviewer Elections: Builders Grants: Gonna.eth, Krzysztof Urbanski (kaereste or krst), Oxytocin.
Council Reviewer Elections: Growth Experiments Grants: Katie Garcia, GFX, StableLab, Michael Vander Meiden, DAOStewards.
Ecosystem updates
In recent weeks, we have accompanied other organizations in the ecosystem in Latam to carry out different activities to bring the vision of Optimism and its technology together and that we want to share:
Optimism Workshop Series 1
Bedrock Launch Party by Optimism Español 2
DAOs, governance and decentralized partipation 2
Bedrock! Bedrock! Bedrock!
Hello all community members! Le’ts recap some of our lastest activities: 13 th Governance Call As…
Hello all community members! Le’ts recap some of our lastest activities: 13 th Governance Call As usual in our Discord channel 1 we held a new governance call to discus the voting cycle 12 b. This was the last round for the upcoming season 4 . Participants: + 40 attendees ( 38 1 :medal_military:collected; special thanks again to Pacha for the design). Duration: 1 hs 19 min. Results Inflation Adjustment Proposal: For Treasury Appropriation (Foundation Year 2 Budget Approval): Against Council Reviewer Elections: Builders Grants: Gonna.eth, Krzysztof Urbanski (kaereste or krst), Oxytocin. Council Reviewer Elections: Growth Experiments Grants: Katie Garcia, GFX, StableLab, Michael Vander Meiden, DAOStewards. Ecosystem updates In recent weeks, we have accompanied other organizations in the ecosystem in Latam to carry out different activities to bring the vision of Optimism and its technology together and that we want to share: Optimism Workshop Series 1 Bedrock Launch Party by Optimism Español 2 DAOs, governance and decentralized partipation 2 Bedrock! Bedrock! Bedrock!
Hi governance and community members!
With season 4 and the launch of the missions, the SEED Latam…
Hi governance and community members!
With season 4 and the launch of the missions, the SEED Latam delegation team is working on revising the mission proposals. For this we have joined forces once and we are counting on the help of @AxlVaz, @CryptoChica, @Jadmat and @Netrim to tackle our duties at the proposals in the forum.
Providing feedback and comments
The number of proposals and the expected impact for this first wave of missions is high, we will take the evaluation and compliance with the criteria of each proposal very seriously, leaving the pertinent comments and questions, and finely analyzing the requirements prior to any approval to move to vote. For it:
Complete review of the structure of the proposal - meet requirements
The funds requested and spending plan - should be reasonable
Reasonable metrics - scope with respect to what is desired by the mission scope
What to analyze first?
As delegates, we received several requests for a review of missions carried out by Latin American projects. In order to be fair in our procedures, we will review all the proposals carried out in this region and address them only and completely in public without preferences. We hope to use our degree of involvement in the Ethereum ecosystem in Latam to reconcile the best interest of Optimism and the benefit of the community in the region.
Immediately after that, we’ll address the rest of the proposals according to our expertise until the last day of tracking the approvals and then moving forward with the proposals approve a vote, of course.
Ready for adventure? optimistic forever
Hi governance and community members! With season 4 and the launch of the missions, the SEED Latam…
Hi governance and community members! With season 4 and the launch of the missions, the SEED Latam delegation team is working on revising the mission proposals. For this we have joined forces once and we are counting on the help of @AxlVaz, @CryptoChica, @Jadmat and @Netrim to tackle our duties at the proposals in the forum. Providing feedback and comments The number of proposals and the expected impact for this first wave of missions is high, we will take the evaluation and compliance with the criteria of each proposal very seriously, leaving the pertinent comments and questions, and finely analyzing the requirements prior to any approval to move to vote. For it: Complete review of the structure of the proposal - meet requirements The funds requested and spending plan - should be reasonable Reasonable metrics - scope with respect to what is desired by the mission scope What to analyze first? As delegates, we received several requests for a review of missions carried out by Latin American projects. In order to be fair in our procedures, we will review all the proposals carried out in this region and address them only and completely in public without preferences. We hope to use our degree of involvement in the Ethereum ecosystem in Latam to reconcile the best interest of Optimism and the benefit of the community in the region. Immediately after that, we’ll address the rest of the proposals according to our expertise until the last day of tracking the approvals and then moving forward with the proposals approve a vote, of course. Ready for adventure? optimistic forever
Hi community!
In this new post we’re going to cover our lastest work in the governance, mainly rega…
Hi community!
In this new post we’re going to cover our lastest work in the governance, mainly regarding to the cycle- 13 .
1 ) 14 th Governance Call
As usual in our Discord channel we held the lastest governance call (July 11 ) to discuss the voting cycle 13 . This voting cycle was concerned to vote on mission proposals.
Participants: ~ 50 attendees ( 46 3 :medal_military: collected)
Duration: 3 hs 26 min.
a) Preparation
For this cycle, we continue our work as a team analyzing the 31 proposals approved for voting. At the same time, we prepared a poll in our SEED Latam snapshot where the attendees of the governance calls could vote for preferred options, taking as a reference the explanation provided during the call.
Consensus rules:
Voting system: approval voting.
Elegible members: POAP holders.
Delegate vote for if: the proposal achieves at least 30 % approval in participation.
b) Discussion
Each proposal had an average of 5 . 47 minutes 4 (thanks Vetefe 1 for the analysis) to explain and discuss its key points, advantages and disadvantages. Each of our collaborators in the delegation took ownership of the speech and let the community issue an opinion in some cases.
On this occasion, we had the presence of members of various Alliances, mostly based in Latin America, such as Criptoversidad 1 , Solow, HER LATAM, Ethereum Mexico. They had the opportunity to present their proposal and answer questions for the community.
Additionally, we had the pleasure of having @brichis, a new OP delegate based in Latin America, who had a space to express her opinion and raise the discussion.
c) Results
Based on our Snapshot poll, the SEED Latam delegation voted for the following proposals:
Intent 1 :
Proposal 1 A: Superchain Governance Deepdive
Proposal 1 B: Fully Decentralized and Independent Oracle and Data Infrastructure
Proposal 1 C: TechNERD Program
Proposal 1 D: Extend the L 1 Block contract to store historical blockhash data
Proposal 1 E: Future-proofing UI/UX of OP nodes
Intent 3 :
Proposal 3 C: BanklessDAO’s Global Campaign to spread the Optimistic vision
Proposal 3 D: Create and Maintain the ‘Optimism Vision Reservoir’
Proposal 3 E: Optimistic Womxn Shinning in Blockchain
Proposal 3 F: Let’s take the Optimistic Vision to LATAM with Espacio Cripto
Proposal 3 G: Spread Optimistic values across Latam with Solow
Proposal 3 I: ‘Thank Optimism - powered by ThriveCoin’
Proposal 3 K: Rumbo Optimista - Hacia Ethereum Mexico The Event || Optimistic Road in the way to Ethereum México The Event
Intent 4 :
Proposal 4 A: Multi-lingual Lesson on Optimism Governance, by Bankless Academy
Proposal 4 B: The RetroPGF Podcast
Proposal 4 C: Delegate Corner Podcas
Proposal 4 K: OP Governance Analytics Dashboard
Proposal 4 L: OPdelegate.com
Proposal 4 M: NumbaNERD Program
Proposal 4 N: Facilitate and empower community members to actively engage in governance through an educational course
2 ) Season 4 : first retrospective
The introduction of the missions introduced a new mechanism for paid contributions by governance in a work fist and get paid manner. The introduction of the missions introduced a new mechanism for paid contributions by governance in a pay-for-work manner. For this, four different verticals were decided, called “intents” to address specific needs expressed by the Collective or completely proposed by third-party teams. Here we want to express a condensation of thoughts that arose during cycle 13 that is orthogonal to different proposals or in the processes in which this opportunity was carried out.
I) Intent 3 : very impact-dependent, less about the actual product
Due to the nature of this scope of the intent and resulting proposals, we saw how difficult is to evaluate the final product and the effectiveness of the features in fulfilling their “functionalities”, being anchored to the wait for results by KPIs to check even the usefulness of the mission. It means that it is possible that the objectives are met but even so the funding has been misallocated.
II) Intent 3 : too much for users, not enough for Builders
There is a saturation of proposals related to education in terms of expected audiences, which potentially overlap in the regular case (not many new users are benefited from these initiatives but they do have a wide reach among the existing community). Particular case of Latam, with 5 proposals, 4 of them with clear connections to each other, and therefore, a similar starting point before reaching a wider public.
On the other hand, there is a lack of initiatives to educate new developers as future builders of real applications in Optimism. This is a pity and an unwanted situation since it means a lack of investment in real use cases for Optimism, the only way to stay competitive and grow steadily in number of users and activity. Intent 2 still contributing in this aspect with the builder sub-committee, but introducing new developers from zero to hero still being great to have.
III) Intent 3 & 4 : effectiveness density vs time, battling obsolescence
One of the most frequently asked aspects is the commitment to prolong the final product once the mission period has ended. While this condition applies to all intents, the evolving nature of governance and change in its design and ecosystem is even more noticeable in educational materials and content. On several occasions there is no evidenced commitment to address this fact (and it is natural that this is the case), but it should be taken into account to maximize the benefits of missions with more explicitly aligned collaborators in the long term and not just waiting for the next retroPGF.
IV) All intents: need for OP distribution doesn’t imply suboptimal allocations
From the last voting cycle with the ratification of the budget, the distribution of the OP token didn’t reach the one stipulated for the Foundation budget. We understand the importance in the circulation of the OP token to make it more liquid, distributed and usable by more users for governance purposes, however, among delegates we should take care of the treasure, no matter the amount, from any possible grant farming intention, lessons learned of the first and second seasons of Optimism in 2022 .
V) Reflection: how to increase the efforts on uniqueness
Ultimately, governance coordination is looking for ways to encourage differentiation between proposals and building real products. Governance needs to provide a better incentive base to avoid incentive gaming between Missions and retroPGF: more review time, incentivized delegates to curation tasks from earlier stages.
3 ) Multichain delegation case
Due to recent events regarding Multichain, we are trying to open a discussion about what to do in cases like these as part of the protocol delegation program.
Protocol Delegation Program Renewal Metagovernance
I would like to discuss Multichain’s participation as part of the protocol delegation program given recent events, which, in addition to the complete halt of its operations, is involved in a series of unclarified events and I personally qualified as shady, in which the users have been exposed to several risks. Main tweet here.
I believe the governance should reconsider the status of Multichain as delegate, even though to my knowledge, there is no clear step for it using the governance administ…
A special thanks to all our direct contributors @AxlVaz, @CryptoChica, @Jadmat, @Netrim and rest of our community for all the support.
More optimistic than ever!
Hi community! In this new post we’re going to cover our lastest work in the governance, mainly rega…
Hi community! In this new post we’re going to cover our lastest work in the governance, mainly regarding to the cycle- 13 . 1 ) 14 th Governance Call As usual in our Discord channel we held the lastest governance call (July 11 ) to discuss the voting cycle 13 . This voting cycle was concerned to vote on mission proposals. Participants: ~ 50 attendees ( 46 3 :medal_military: collected) Duration: 3 hs 26 min. a) Preparation For this cycle, we continue our work as a team analyzing the 31 proposals approved for voting. At the same time, we prepared a poll in our SEED Latam snapshot where the attendees of the governance calls could vote for preferred options, taking as a reference the explanation provided during the call. Consensus rules: Voting system: approval voting. Elegible members: POAP holders. Delegate vote for if: the proposal achieves at least 30 % approval in participation. b) Discussion Each proposal had an average of 5 . 47 minutes 4 (thanks Vetefe 1 for the analysis) to explain and discuss its key points, advantages and disadvantages. Each of our collaborators in the delegation took ownership of the speech and let the community issue an opinion in some cases. On this occasion, we had the presence of members of various Alliances, mostly based in Latin America, such as Criptoversidad 1 , Solow, HER LATAM, Ethereum Mexico. They had the opportunity to present their proposal and answer questions for the community. Additionally, we had the pleasure of having @brichis, a new OP delegate based in Latin America, who had a space to express her opinion and raise the discussion. c) Results Based on our Snapshot poll, the SEED Latam delegation voted for the following proposals: Intent 1 : Proposal 1 A: Superchain Governance Deepdive Proposal 1 B: Fully Decentralized and Independent Oracle and Data Infrastructure Proposal 1 C: TechNERD Program Proposal 1 D: Extend the L 1 Block contract to store historical blockhash data Proposal 1 E: Future-proofing UI/UX of OP nodes Intent 3 : Proposal 3 C: BanklessDAO’s Global Campaign to spread the Optimistic vision Proposal 3 D: Create and Maintain the ‘Optimism Vision Reservoir’ Proposal 3 E: Optimistic Womxn Shinning in Blockchain Proposal 3 F: Let’s take the Optimistic Vision to LATAM with Espacio Cripto Proposal 3 G: Spread Optimistic values across Latam with Solow Proposal 3 I: ‘Thank Optimism - powered by ThriveCoin’ Proposal 3 K: Rumbo Optimista - Hacia Ethereum Mexico The Event || Optimistic Road in the way to Ethereum México The Event Intent 4 : Proposal 4 A: Multi-lingual Lesson on Optimism Governance, by Bankless Academy Proposal 4 B: The RetroPGF Podcast Proposal 4 C: Delegate Corner Podcas Proposal 4 K: OP Governance Analytics Dashboard Proposal 4 L: OPdelegate.com Proposal 4 M: NumbaNERD Program Proposal 4 N: Facilitate and empower community members to actively engage in governance through an educational course 2 ) Season 4 : first retrospective The introduction of the missions introduced a new mechanism for paid contributions by governance in a work fist and get paid manner. The introduction of the missions introduced a new mechanism for paid contributions by governance in a pay-for-work manner. For this, four different verticals were decided, called “intents” to address specific needs expressed by the Collective or completely proposed by third-party teams. Here we want to express a condensation of thoughts that arose during cycle 13 that is orthogonal to different proposals or in the processes in which this opportunity was carried out. I) Intent 3 : very impact-dependent, less about the actual product Due to the nature of this scope of the intent and resulting proposals, we saw how difficult is to evaluate the final product and the effectiveness of the features in fulfilling their “functionalities”, being anchored to the wait for results by KPIs to check even the usefulness of the mission. It means that it is possible that the objectives are met but even so the funding has been misallocated. II) Intent 3 : too much for users, not enough for Builders There is a saturation of proposals related to education in terms of expected audiences, which potentially overlap in the regular case (not many new users are benefited from these initiatives but they do have a wide reach among the existing community). Particular case of Latam, with 5 proposals, 4 of them with clear connections to each other, and therefore, a similar starting point before reaching a wider public. On the other hand, there is a lack of initiatives to educate new developers as future builders of real applications in Optimism. This is a pity and an unwanted situation since it means a lack of investment in real use cases for Optimism, the only way to stay competitive and grow steadily in number of users and activity. Intent 2 still contributing in this aspect with the builder sub-committee, but introducing new developers from zero to hero still being great to have. III) Intent 3 & 4 : effectiveness density vs time, battling obsolescence One of the most frequently asked aspects is the commitment to prolong the final product once the mission period has ended. While this condition applies to all intents, the evolving nature of governance and change in its design and ecosystem is even more noticeable in educational materials and content. On several occasions there is no evidenced commitment to address this fact (and it is natural that this is the case), but it should be taken into account to maximize the benefits of missions with more explicitly aligned collaborators in the long term and not just waiting for the next retroPGF. IV) All intents: need for OP distribution doesn’t imply suboptimal allocations From the last voting cycle with the ratification of the budget, the distribution of the OP token didn’t reach the one stipulated for the Foundation budget. We understand the importance in the circulation of the OP token to make it more liquid, distributed and usable by more users for governance purposes, however, among delegates we should take care of the treasure, no matter the amount, from any possible grant farming intention, lessons learned of the first and second seasons of Optimism in 2022 . V) Reflection: how to increase the efforts on uniqueness Ultimately, governance coordination is looking for ways to encourage differentiation between proposals and building real products. Governance needs to provide a better incentive base to avoid incentive gaming between Missions and retroPGF: more review time, incentivized delegates to curation tasks from earlier stages. 3 ) Multichain delegation case Due to recent events regarding Multichain, we are trying to open a discussion about what to do in cases like these as part of the protocol delegation program. Protocol Delegation Program Renewal Metagovernance I would like to discuss Multichain’s participation as part of the protocol delegation program given recent events, which, in addition to the complete halt of its operations, is involved in a series of unclarified events and I personally qualified as shady, in which the users have been exposed to several risks. Main tweet here. I believe the governance should reconsider the status of Multichain as delegate, even though to my knowledge, there is no clear step for it using the governance administ… A special thanks to all our direct contributors @AxlVaz, @CryptoChica, @Jadmat, @Netrim and rest of our community for all the support. More optimistic than ever!
Thanks for this fantastic analysis and yup, here it’s something that we all noted, and a future adv…
Thanks for this fantastic analysis and yup, here it’s something that we all noted, and a future advise to decentralize our own projects.
We continue being the same people in the same conferences, let’s take our country’s broader and coordination stronger.
Thanks for this fantastic analysis and yup, here it’s something that we all noted, and a future adv…
Thanks for this fantastic analysis and yup, here it’s something that we all noted, and a future advise to decentralize our own projects. We continue being the same people in the same conferences, let’s take our country’s broader and coordination stronger.
We have posted an analysis about the delegate participation, current workload and incentives, highl…
We have posted an analysis about the delegate participation, current workload and incentives, highlighting the need for better mechanisms to increase the number of participants and diversity of voices.
A shared effort by our team @AxlVaz, @CryptoChica, @Jadmat, Joxes and @Netrim.
Token House participation and incentives: an extended analysis
Summary
Optimism Token House has been active for 1 year going through five seasons facing numerous changes throughout each season pursuing the best interest for the Optimism ecosystem. From the season 0 to 4 , Optimism governance has established different processes for managing governance funds, protocol updates and other decisions to which delegates have had to adapt, even making the process more complex to guarantee; for example, the correct allocation of funds, with the introduction of committees, and later, the Grant Council. Over time, it has been possible to demonstrate the heavy workload that the delegates have had to face. For season 4 , less than half of the delegates (> 0 . 25 %) had an active participation during the feedback and approval to vote process. In order to align the work of delegates and broaden the desire to participate, we believe that the path is to improve the incentive system aka rewards, as a way to increase the quality and fulfillment of the final goals.
We have posted an analysis about the delegate participation, current workload and incentives, highl…
We have posted an analysis about the delegate participation, current workload and incentives, highlighting the need for better mechanisms to increase the number of participants and diversity of voices. A shared effort by our team @AxlVaz, @CryptoChica, @Jadmat, Joxes and @Netrim. Token House participation and incentives: an extended analysis Summary Optimism Token House has been active for 1 year going through five seasons facing numerous changes throughout each season pursuing the best interest for the Optimism ecosystem. From the season 0 to 4 , Optimism governance has established different processes for managing governance funds, protocol updates and other decisions to which delegates have had to adapt, even making the process more complex to guarantee; for example, the correct allocation of funds, with the introduction of committees, and later, the Grant Council. Over time, it has been possible to demonstrate the heavy workload that the delegates have had to face. For season 4 , less than half of the delegates (> 0 . 25 %) had an active participation during the feedback and approval to vote process. In order to align the work of delegates and broaden the desire to participate, we believe that the path is to improve the incentive system aka rewards, as a way to increase the quality and fulfillment of the final goals.
Hi OP community!
In this post we’re going to recap what we did this week around the cycle 14 .
1…
Hi OP community!
In this post we’re going to recap what we did this week around the cycle 14 .
15 th Governance Call
The past monday Discord channel we held a new governance call to discuss the voting cycle 14 , specifically a proposal made by the Grants Council requesting a new budget for the Intent 2 2 .
Participants: ~ 40 attendees ( 31 :medal_military: collected)
Duration: 1 hr 29 min.
Results and rationale
After a great summary provided by @Gonna.eth during the call, we had a complete picture about the current state of the Grants Council and motivations for the proposal. Finally we voted for.
[FINAL] Intent # 2 Budget Proposal # 2 Grants
We’re voting for this proposal.
The rationale here is pretty coherent and it’s clear that Intent 2 has happily had a lot of work to do and it would be a shame if it were limited due to lack of funds. Realocating/rebalancing the unused funds from Season 4 to Intent 2 is a wise idea.
Also, we had the opportunity to listen to @Gonna.eth, who came to our OP Governance Call # 15 at SEED Latam, in which we were able to see first-hand the current work of the Grants Council and how they are evaluating …
Welcome to Base
The announcement of Base into the Superchain is a game changer and positive addition for the Optimism ecosystem. This deal and commitment assumed by Base to, among other things, participate in governance, is also an important point of consideration. Jesse Pollak has requested comments on how Base will participate in Governance; and we have responded as below:
How Base will participate in Optimism Governance Metagovernance
Hi Jesse and @Base team; appreciated the intention to join the Optimism ecosystem and its Collective. Recognizing the substantial weight this collaboration and deal holds, as SEED latam delegation, we have sit down to reflect on each of the questions and answer them appropriately. As the first OP chain to get involved in governance, due to the commitment assumed from inception and the background behind the project, there are a lot of advantages and opportunities that cannot be missed. So:
In…
Hi OP community! In this post we’re going to recap what we did this week around the cycle 14 . 1…
Hi OP community! In this post we’re going to recap what we did this week around the cycle 14 . 15 th Governance Call The past monday Discord channel we held a new governance call to discuss the voting cycle 14 , specifically a proposal made by the Grants Council requesting a new budget for the Intent 2 2 . Participants: ~ 40 attendees ( 31 :medal_military: collected) Duration: 1 hr 29 min. Results and rationale After a great summary provided by @Gonna.eth during the call, we had a complete picture about the current state of the Grants Council and motivations for the proposal. Finally we voted for. [FINAL] Intent # 2 Budget Proposal # 2 Grants We’re voting for this proposal. The rationale here is pretty coherent and it’s clear that Intent 2 has happily had a lot of work to do and it would be a shame if it were limited due to lack of funds. Realocating/rebalancing the unused funds from Season 4 to Intent 2 is a wise idea. Also, we had the opportunity to listen to @Gonna.eth, who came to our OP Governance Call # 15 at SEED Latam, in which we were able to see first-hand the current work of the Grants Council and how they are evaluating … Welcome to Base The announcement of Base into the Superchain is a game changer and positive addition for the Optimism ecosystem. This deal and commitment assumed by Base to, among other things, participate in governance, is also an important point of consideration. Jesse Pollak has requested comments on how Base will participate in Governance; and we have responded as below: How Base will participate in Optimism Governance Metagovernance Hi Jesse and @Base team; appreciated the intention to join the Optimism ecosystem and its Collective. Recognizing the substantial weight this collaboration and deal holds, as SEED latam delegation, we have sit down to reflect on each of the questions and answer them appropriately. As the first OP chain to get involved in governance, due to the commitment assumed from inception and the background behind the project, there are a lot of advantages and opportunities that cannot be missed. So: In…
Joxes nomination for retroPGF 3
Hello all!
Joxes here, this time reaching out to share an importan…
Joxes nomination for retroPGF 3
Hello all!
Joxes here, this time reaching out to share an important update as a badgeholder. I’m thrilled to announce that I have distributed my additional voting badge to a very deserving individual - Lucy Aguilar.
Choosing a new badgeholder
Since the announcement of the retroPGF 3 and continuation of the badgeholders from the previous round, I have been thinking about how to distribute my voting badge in such a way that my decision impacts as positively as possible for the round and the future of Citizen House itself. Additionally, I believe that Optimism, Layer 2 , and Ethereum communities in Latin America have made a great difference, and the public goods movement is becoming stronger, -step by step- making our long-awaited vision of being a net-positive tool for our society a reality.
So in that order of going and various candidates, in conversation with close friends, there is someone who meets the recommended selection criteria and proven expertise, I believe she is Lucy Aguilar.
Who is Lucy Aguilar?
Lucy Aguilar 4 (@Lucya_eth) from Honduras :honduras:, is an Internationalist, Community Leader of Ethereum Tegucigalpa & Ethereum Honduras 1 , and a pivotal member of the @ETHKipu team working with Kipu Impact. Her rich history with the Ethereum communities in Tegucigalpa and Honduras has seen her playing a important role in orchestrating two Quadratic Funding rounds.
Why Lucy Aguilar?
Lucy’s dedication to the Ethereum communities in Tegucigalpa and Honduras spans over three enriching years, during which she has contributed in 2 Quadratic Funding rounds — one in December 2021 and the other in July 2023 . She has participated in the process round design, evaluation, and monitoring of beneficiary projects. This, in my opinion, is a great precedent that can be very helpful for the group.
Plus, Lucy has already experienced what it’s like to be a badgeholder almost first-hand! Since she had the opportunity to contribute and advise @CryptoChica as a badgeholder in the previous round of retroPGF, which already provides her with a lot of context on how these mechanisms work.
RetroPGF Round 2 Voting Rationale
I brought this proposal to my commission, and it was positively received. Given the titanic task and the deadlines, my vote was agreed upon with part of the Public Goods team at ETH Kipu - instead of the entire commission - where I was accompanied by Cris Garner and Lucy Aguilar . Both have previous experiences in quadratic funding rounds and were pioneers in organizing a round in Honduras, which became the first Latin American country to organize a QF round for public goods. You can read the summary of that round here .
Lucy is a very hardworking person and very involved in the Ethereum ecosystem, in addition to having met her in different community spaces, and happy to give her this opportunity. I believe she can contribute a lot to this retroPGF, and after speaking with her, I was able to confirm this positive energy.
Final words
I expect that in each retroPGF there will be greater diversity among badgeholders who are aligned with the Optimism and Ethereum values while contributing expertise from all sides.
From my side, I invite you all to join me in welcoming @Lucya_eth and keep working together to make this round successful for the whole ecosystem!
Thank you so much, Joxes. I am really excited to contribute to the 3 RetroPGF of Optimism. Also, …
Thank you so much, Joxes. I am really excited to contribute to the 3 RetroPGF of Optimism. Also, I am happy to represent Ethereum Honduras Community and to be part of the governance dynamic in web 3 .
¡Vamos con todo! :honduras: :honduras: :honduras:
Joxes nomination for retroPGF 3 Hello all! Joxes here, this time reaching out to share an importan…
Joxes nomination for retroPGF 3 Hello all! Joxes here, this time reaching out to share an important update as a badgeholder. I’m thrilled to announce that I have distributed my additional voting badge to a very deserving individual - Lucy Aguilar. Choosing a new badgeholder Since the announcement of the retroPGF 3 and continuation of the badgeholders from the previous round, I have been thinking about how to distribute my voting badge in such a way that my decision impacts as positively as possible for the round and the future of Citizen House itself. Additionally, I believe that Optimism, Layer 2 , and Ethereum communities in Latin America have made a great difference, and the public goods movement is becoming stronger, -step by step- making our long-awaited vision of being a net-positive tool for our society a reality. So in that order of going and various candidates, in conversation with close friends, there is someone who meets the recommended selection criteria and proven expertise, I believe she is Lucy Aguilar. Who is Lucy Aguilar? Lucy Aguilar 3 (@Lucya_eth) from Honduras :honduras:, is an Internationalist, Community Leader of Ethereum Tegucigalpa & Ethereum Honduras 1 , and a pivotal member of the @ETHKipu team working with Kipu Impact. Her rich history with the Ethereum communities in Tegucigalpa and Honduras has seen her playing a important role in orchestrating two Quadratic Funding rounds. Why Lucy Aguilar? Lucy’s dedication to the Ethereum communities in Tegucigalpa and Honduras spans over three enriching years, during which she has contributed in 2 Quadratic Funding rounds — one in December 2021 and the other in July 2023 . She has participated in the process round design, evaluation, and monitoring of beneficiary projects. This, in my opinion, is a great precedent that can be very helpful for the group. Plus, Lucy has already experienced what it’s like to be a badgeholder almost first-hand! Since she had the opportunity to contribute and advise @CryptoChica as a badgeholder in the previous round of retroPGF, which already provides her with a lot of context on how these mechanisms work. RetroPGF Round 2 Voting Rationale I brought this proposal to my commission, and it was positively received. Given the titanic task and the deadlines, my vote was agreed upon with part of the Public Goods team at ETH Kipu - instead of the entire commission - where I was accompanied by Cris Garner and Lucy Aguilar . Both have previous experiences in quadratic funding rounds and were pioneers in organizing a round in Honduras, which became the first Latin American country to organize a QF round for public goods. You can read the summary of that round here . Lucy is a very hardworking person and very involved in the Ethereum ecosystem, in addition to having met her in different community spaces, and happy to give her this opportunity. I believe she can contribute a lot to this retroPGF, and after speaking with her, I was able to confirm this positive energy. Final words I expect that in each retroPGF there will be greater diversity among badgeholders who are aligned with the Optimism and Ethereum values while contributing expertise from all sides. From my side, I invite you all to join me in welcoming @Lucya_eth and keep working together to make this round successful for the whole ecosystem!
Thank you so much, Joxes. I am really excited to contribute to the 3 RetroPGF of Optimism. Also, …
Thank you so much, Joxes. I am really excited to contribute to the 3 RetroPGF of Optimism. Also, I am happy to represent Ethereum Honduras Community and to be part of the governance dynamic in web 3 . ¡Vamos con todo! :honduras: :honduras: :honduras:
Hello community!
The road to Season 5 becomes exciting, and we want to post our rationales after …
Hello community!
The road to Season 5 becomes exciting, and we want to post our rationales after the 16 th voting cycle.
16 th Governance Call
On Oct 23 th we had our Governance Call to discuss the upcoming changes proposed for Season 5 .
Participants: ~ 44 attendees ( 40 :medal_military: collected).
Duration: 1 hr 59 min.
Results and rationale
We have put our rationale into the threads referring to the changes proposed for Season 5 ; check below
Anticapture Comission
Anticapture Commission Metagovernance
We vote FOR the introduction of the Anticapture Commission, but we wish to share some critical insights alongside the arguments presented by other delegates.
Part of this stems from the history of progression of the distribution of voting power among delegates since inception and the allocation of OP tokens across so many different purposes, which has not had the same impact on their use as a governance token. Although the distribution of OP tokens was implicity recognized since the allocation …
Security Council: Vote # 1
Security Council: Vote # 1 - Change to Security Model Technical Proposals ?
Thank you so much @bobby for the explanation. Nothing more to add, now is more clear for us.
We vote FOR this proposal.
The eventual introduction of the Security Council is an obvious step in the right direction and we are happy that it’s happening now. The details provided in the documentation and clarifications in this thread lead us to believe that Security Council Charter cover all the necessary points to achieve its effectiveness and reduce the previous risks as well as the new ones with …
Code of Conduct Coucil Budget
Code of Conduct Councils Metagovernance
We vote FOR the introduction of CoC Council.
We had different arguments and points of view about the pros and cons of introducing this Council. In short, as a trusted, neutral group to handle and make decisions on sensitive complaints such as doxxing, the CoC Council is better than getting delegates to form an opinion on the case. We consider that this is progress. On the other hand, a current concern is what happens when the conflict escalates, and members feel irrational pressure prior to the…
Grants Council Operating Budget
Season 5 Grants Council Operating Budget Delegates ?
We vote FOR the Grants Council Operating Budget.
Not much to say here, we have followed the work done by the Grants Council from the outside and we know the workload that it really entailed last season, so the addition of new reviewers is reasonable. The same with the new challenges encountered, such as the tracking of appropriate proposals, so the new role conceived for milestones and metrics is also a natural step.
Developer Advisory Board Budget and Ratify Developer Advisory Board Members
Developer Advisory Board Metagovernance
We vote FOR both the board budget and ratifity its proposed members.
We are happy to see the Foundation take more initiatives like these that promote diversity and encourage the collective to progressively begin to take ownership and self-regulation in the technical part of the protocol and contributions in that aspect; very in line also with the now presence of 3 core teams for the Collective. The budget proposed as baseline is reasonable, considering the possibility of being rewarded retroact…
Code of Conduct Violation: Carlos Melgar
About this one, our second point expressed in a previous case 2 about how to improve these processes becomes more relevant. In line with the comments of the other delegates, the upcoming installation of the CoC Council and some quotes referring to publications originating from this account; with all this in mind, it is appropriate for us to decide to abstain.
Code of Conduct Violation: Carlos Melgar Technical Proposals ?
Proposal Title: Code of Conduct Violation: Carlos Melgar
Proposal Type: Code of Conduct Violation
Executive Summary
A community member has filed a report, substantiated by documentation, against grant recipient Carlos Melgar.
Discord name: carlosjmelgar
Reported violation: Intentional doxxing
Enforcement type: Suspension
As outlined in the Code of Conduct, the Token House must vote to suspend grant recipients that are reported to have committed severe violations, which include intentional do…
See you at the next voting cycle!
Hello community! The road to Season 5 becomes exciting, and we want to post our rationales after …
Hello community! The road to Season 5 becomes exciting, and we want to post our rationales after the 16 th voting cycle. 16 th Governance Call On Oct 23 th we had our Governance Call to discuss the upcoming changes proposed for Season 5 . Participants: ~ 44 attendees ( 40 :medal_military: collected). Duration: 1 hr 59 min. Results and rationale We have put our rationale into the threads referring to the changes proposed for Season 5 ; check below Anticapture Comission Anticapture Commission Metagovernance We vote FOR the introduction of the Anticapture Commission, but we wish to share some critical insights alongside the arguments presented by other delegates. Part of this stems from the history of progression of the distribution of voting power among delegates since inception and the allocation of OP tokens across so many different purposes, which has not had the same impact on their use as a governance token. Although the distribution of OP tokens was implicity recognized since the allocation … Security Council: Vote # 1 Security Council: Vote # 1 - Change to Security Model ?Other Proposals Thank you so much @bobby for the explanation. Nothing more to add, now is more clear for us. We vote FOR this proposal. The eventual introduction of the Security Council is an obvious step in the right direction and we are happy that it’s happening now. The details provided in the documentation and clarifications in this thread lead us to believe that Security Council Charter cover all the necessary points to achieve its effectiveness and reduce the previous risks as well as the new ones with … Code of Conduct Coucil Budget Code of Conduct Councils Metagovernance We vote FOR the introduction of CoC Council. We had different arguments and points of view about the pros and cons of introducing this Council. In short, as a trusted, neutral group to handle and make decisions on sensitive complaints such as doxxing, the CoC Council is better than getting delegates to form an opinion on the case. We consider that this is progress. On the other hand, a current concern is what happens when the conflict escalates, and members feel irrational pressure prior to the… Grants Council Operating Budget Season 5 Grants Council Operating Budget ? Token House Governance We vote FOR the Grants Council Operating Budget. Not much to say here, we have followed the work done by the Grants Council from the outside and we know the workload that it really entailed last season, so the addition of new reviewers is reasonable. The same with the new challenges encountered, such as the tracking of appropriate proposals, so the new role conceived for milestones and metrics is also a natural step. Developer Advisory Board Budget and Ratify Developer Advisory Board Members Developer Advisory Board Metagovernance We vote FOR both the board budget and ratifity its proposed members. We are happy to see the Foundation take more initiatives like these that promote diversity and encourage the collective to progressively begin to take ownership and self-regulation in the technical part of the protocol and contributions in that aspect; very in line also with the now presence of 3 core teams for the Collective. The budget proposed as baseline is reasonable, considering the possibility of being rewarded retroact… Code of Conduct Violation: Carlos Melgar About this one, our second point expressed in a previous case 2 about how to improve these processes becomes more relevant. In line with the comments of the other delegates, the upcoming installation of the CoC Council and some quotes referring to publications originating from this account; with all this in mind, it is appropriate for us to decide to abstain. Code of Conduct Violation: Carlos Melgar ?Other Proposals Proposal Title: Code of Conduct Violation: Carlos Melgar Proposal Type: Code of Conduct Violation Executive Summary A community member has filed a report, substantiated by documentation, against grant recipient Carlos Melgar. Discord name: carlosjmelgar Reported violation: Intentional doxxing Enforcement type: Suspension As outlined in the Code of Conduct, the Token House must vote to suspend grant recipients that are reported to have committed severe violations, which include intentional do… See you at the next voting cycle!
Hey all!
Here is a quick update about our recent decisions. Some members of the @SEEDGov team had t…
Hey all!
Here is a quick update about our recent decisions. Some members of the @SEEDGov team had to travel to Istanbul for Devconnect so we couldn’t hold a governance call for the previous voting cycle. However, we could make decisions as a team and reach a consensus internally.
Results
Ratification of Law of Chains: FOR
Chain Delegation Program: FOR
Season 5 Intent Budgets: FOR
Code of Conduct Council – Member Nominations: Juankbell, Oxytocin, Axel_T, Juanbug_PGov and Bubli.eth
Grants Council Reviewer Elections – Milestones and Metrics: Feiwian, Raho, v 3 naru_Curia.
Grants Council Reviewer Elections – Growth Experiments: Michael Vander Meiden, Katie Garcia, GFX, Brichis, Subli_Defi.
Grants Council Reviewer Elections – Builders: Jack Anorak, Gonna.eth, Kaereste, 0 xMilton Joxes
Personal words: I want to thank everyone who supported this nomination in the Grants Council Builders elections; I feel a great responsibility to the group and future applicants. I will do my best to collaborate with the elected council team and recruit the best builders of the web 3 ecosystem to benefit the Optimism ecosystem and its collective.
Hey all! Here is a quick update about our recent decisions. Some members of the @SEEDLatam team had…
Hey all! Here is a quick update about our recent decisions. Some members of the @SEEDLatam team had to travel to Istanbul for Devconnect so we couldn’t hold a governance call for the previous voting cycle. However, we could make decisions as a team and reach a consensus internally. Results Ratification of Law of Chains: FOR Chain Delegation Program: FOR Season 5 Intent Budgets: FOR Code of Conduct Council – Member Nominations: Juankbell, Oxytocin, Axel_T, Juanbug_PGov and Bubli.eth Grants Council Reviewer Elections – Milestones and Metrics: Feiwian, Raho, v 3 naru_Curia. Grants Council Reviewer Elections – Growth Experiments: Michael Vander Meiden, Katie Garcia, GFX, Brichis, Subli_Defi. Grants Council Reviewer Elections – Builders: Jack Anorak, Gonna.eth, Kaereste, 0 xMilton Joxes Personal words: I want to thank everyone who supported this nomination in the Grants Council Builders elections; I feel a great responsibility to the group and future applicants. I will do my best to collaborate with the elected council team and recruit the best builders of the web 3 ecosystem to benefit the Optimism ecosystem and its collective.
Hey there!
As part of the special voting cycle 16 c, we are documenting our decisions and relevant…
Hey there!
As part of the special voting cycle 16 c, we are documenting our decisions and relevant insights regarding proposals for the near future.
Results:
Ratify Security Council Members: FOR
This ratification was not easy/straightforward since we and other delegates asked questions about the proposal. However, there are still some technical issues pending that need to be formalized.
Security Council Vote # 2 – Initial Member Ratification Elections
We voted FOR this proposal.
I want to clarify in this thread that we are pleased to see that the security council is finally taking place. However, as we have done before, we emphasize that the current technical implementation should be communicated promptly and adequately to the governance.
During the retroPGF 3 vote, we only became aware of the existence of a team of testers. Therefore, we expect a more formal report before any implementation.
Upgrade # 2 : Canyon Protocol Upgrade: FOR
Rollup updates are a regular occurrence as new architectures and improvements are proposed. We strongly encourage the technical community to test this latest version to ensure any relevant issues are reported and any potential risks associated with the upgrade are avoided.
Hey there! As part of the special voting cycle 16 c, we are documenting our decisions and relevant…
Hey there! As part of the special voting cycle 16 c, we are documenting our decisions and relevant insights regarding proposals for the near future. Results: Ratify Security Council Members: FOR This ratification was not easy/straightforward since we and other delegates asked questions about the proposal. However, there are still some technical issues pending that need to be formalized. Security Council Vote # 2 – Initial Member Ratification Elections We voted FOR this proposal. I want to clarify in this thread that we are pleased to see that the security council is finally taking place. However, as we have done before, we emphasize that the current technical implementation should be communicated promptly and adequately to the governance. During the retroPGF 3 vote, we only became aware of the existence of a team of testers. Therefore, we expect a more formal report before any implementation. Upgrade # 2 : Canyon Protocol Upgrade: FOR Rollup updates are a regular occurrence as new architectures and improvements are proposed. We strongly encourage the technical community to test this latest version to ensure any relevant issues are reported and any potential risks associated with the upgrade are avoided.
UPDATE 2024 : At SEED Latam, we are a constantly evolving community, dynamically adapting to ecosy…
UPDATE 2024 : At SEED Latam, we are a constantly evolving community, dynamically adapting to ecosystem transformations to continue providing value and a critical vision, as expressed in our presentation in the Delegates Commitments thread almost two years ago in the Collective.
We have grown and evolved, iterating just like the Collective does. Transitioning from DeFi LATAM to SEED Latam, we have expanded our reach and reaffirmed our commitment to supporting communities and leaders in Latin America. Throughout 2022 and 2023 , we organized over 15 governance calls with the participation of 161 individuals. In each community meeting, we shared updates and discussed governance and protocol proposals, inviting members of the Optimism Collective (delegates, builders, among others) to promote the Optimistic Vision.
Looking ahead to the new year, with the expansion of governance and new responsibilities as delegate (Anticapture Commission, Joxes position on Grants Council, among other tasks), and maintaining the collaborative spirit that characterizes us, we have integrated new members into the team to stay current with Optimism’s governance.
The new team members who will contribute and accompany us on this journey are:
@Manugotsuka: Electrical Engineer. Researcher in L 2 en Español, specifically on articles related to Ethereum’s scaling solutions, including Optimism news. He contributes to governance for SEED Latam, where he has assisted the Arbitrum delegation in various functions such as community calls, proposal drafting, and decision-making. He is also part of the team that forms the “Education, Community Growth, and Events” domain, responsible for evaluating and allocating grants to boost the Arbitrum ecosystem. Now he collaborates with supporting Optimism’s Anticapture Commission responsibilities by assisting the delegation with specific tasks.
@Pumbi: Business Administration. Head of Content at Solow 1 and Team Leader of Optimism en Español. Deeply involved in the Optimism ecosystem, he is part of the Ambassadors, Translators, and Support NERDs program. He is collaborating in the day-to-day activities of the delegation, such as in the Mission Request tracking.
@habacuc.eth: Innovation and Development Engineer with Master’s in Technology Management. R&D at Zenbit.eth, a digital laboratory. Since 2020 , he has developed several web 3 prototypes with OSS, with 2 projects presented at the Innovation in Transparency Contest 2022 and 2023 organized by the National Institute of Transparency, Access to Information (INAI). He documented the process in the article “DAO Cities: Decentralizing city data and governance using Web 3 ,” published in Mexico Transparente magazine of the National Transparency System in Mexico. He participated as a “Catalyst” in the ReFi DAO and has organized workshops and presentations on web 3 in the city of Querétaro. He contributes to supporting Joxes in tasks related to Missions and Grants Council.
With this renewed team, we will cover our responsibilities, continue contributing to the Collective and continue spreading the Optimistic Vision worldwide. We want to express our gratitude to the team that accompanied us in previous seasons: @NicoProducto 1 , @Netrim, @Jadmat, and @CryptoChica 1 , with whom we shared throughout the past seasons. Thanks to their dedication, we have stayed updated with all governance decisions and shared them with the community.
We will also change the focus of governance calls, which we have conducted continuously during previous seasons. In a few weeks, we will announce the changes.
Finally, we want to thank everyone who is part of the Optimistic Collective and our community for accompanying us. We hope to continue providing a different voice and perspective to governance. Stay Optimistic!
Voting Cycle # 17 decisions
Three proposals were put forward for consideration by the delegates; W…
Voting Cycle # 17 decisions
Three proposals were put forward for consideration by the delegates; We summarize below our decisions made:
Upgrade Proposal # 3 : Delta Network Upgrade: For
After reviewing and consulting on the implications of this upgrade, we support it.
[FINAL] Upgrade Proposal # 3 : Delta Network Upgrade Protocol Upgrade
Voting FOR this proposal.
The presented information and worst-case scenarios explained in the proposal indicate that the implementation is ready for going forward.
As always, we encourage any consideration that may arise before the implementation to be promptly communicated.
Proposal to Reclassify Grant Misusage Enforcement: For
We support the proposed changes and hope the Code of Conduct Council will do a good job. If these changes result in a worse process, we will advocate for reversion or iteration.
Summary of Code of Conduct enforcement decisions: No action taken
We don’t have any compelling reasons to vote against.
UPDATE 2024 : At SEED Latam, we are a constantly evolving community, dynamically adapting to ecosy…
UPDATE 2024 : At SEED Latam, we are a constantly evolving community, dynamically adapting to ecosystem transformations to continue providing value and a critical vision, as expressed in our presentation in the Delegates Commitments thread almost two years ago in the Collective. We have grown and evolved, iterating just like the Collective does. Transitioning from DeFi LATAM to SEED Latam, we have expanded our reach and reaffirmed our commitment to supporting communities and leaders in Latin America. Throughout 2022 and 2023 , we organized over 15 governance calls with the participation of 161 individuals. In each community meeting, we shared updates and discussed governance and protocol proposals, inviting members of the Optimism Collective (delegates, builders, among others) to promote the Optimistic Vision. Looking ahead to the new year, with the expansion of governance and new responsibilities as delegate (Anticapture Commission, Joxes position on Grants Council, among other tasks), and maintaining the collaborative spirit that characterizes us, we have integrated new members into the team to stay current with Optimism’s governance. The new team members who will contribute and accompany us on this journey are: @Manugotsuka: Electrical Engineer. Researcher in L 2 en Español, specifically on articles related to Ethereum’s scaling solutions, including Optimism news. He contributes to governance for SEED Latam, where he has assisted the Arbitrum delegation in various functions such as community calls, proposal drafting, and decision-making. He is also part of the team that forms the “Education, Community Growth, and Events” domain, responsible for evaluating and allocating grants to boost the Arbitrum ecosystem. Now he collaborates with supporting Optimism’s Anticapture Commission responsibilities by assisting the delegation with specific tasks. @Pumbi: Business Administration. Head of Content at Solow 1 and Team Leader of Optimism en Español. Deeply involved in the Optimism ecosystem, he is part of the Ambassadors, Translators, and Support NERDs program. He is collaborating in the day-to-day activities of the delegation, such as in the Mission Request tracking. @habacuc.eth: Innovation and Development Engineer with Master’s in Technology Management. R&D at Zenbit.eth, a digital laboratory. Since 2020 , he has developed several web 3 prototypes with OSS, with 2 projects presented at the Innovation in Transparency Contest 2022 and 2023 organized by the National Institute of Transparency, Access to Information (INAI). He documented the process in the article “DAO Cities: Decentralizing city data and governance using Web 3 ,” published in Mexico Transparente magazine of the National Transparency System in Mexico. He participated as a “Catalyst” in the ReFi DAO and has organized workshops and presentations on web 3 in the city of Querétaro. He contributes to supporting Joxes in tasks related to Missions and Grants Council. With this renewed team, we will cover our responsibilities, continue contributing to the Collective and continue spreading the Optimistic Vision worldwide. We want to express our gratitude to the team that accompanied us in previous seasons: @NicoProducto 1 , @Netrim, @Jadmat, and @CryptoChica 1 , with whom we shared throughout the past seasons. Thanks to their dedication, we have stayed updated with all governance decisions and shared them with the community. We will also change the focus of governance calls, which we have conducted continuously during previous seasons. In a few weeks, we will announce the changes. Finally, we want to thank everyone who is part of the Optimistic Collective and our community for accompanying us. We hope to continue providing a different voice and perspective to governance. Stay Optimistic!
Voting Cycle # 17 decisions Three proposals were put forward for consideration by the delegates; W…
Voting Cycle # 17 decisions Three proposals were put forward for consideration by the delegates; We summarize below our decisions made: Upgrade Proposal # 3 : Delta Network Upgrade: For After reviewing and consulting on the implications of this upgrade, we support it. [FINAL] Upgrade Proposal # 3 : Delta Network Upgrade Protocol Upgrade Voting FOR this proposal. The presented information and worst-case scenarios explained in the proposal indicate that the implementation is ready for going forward. As always, we encourage any consideration that may arise before the implementation to be promptly communicated. Proposal to Reclassify Grant Misusage Enforcement: For We support the proposed changes and hope the Code of Conduct Council will do a good job. If these changes result in a worse process, we will advocate for reversion or iteration. Summary of Code of Conduct enforcement decisions: No action taken We don’t have any compelling reasons to vote against.
Voting Cycle # 18 decisions
During the first weeks of cycle 18 , the delegation was busy reviewin…
Voting Cycle # 18 decisions
During the first weeks of cycle 18 , the delegation was busy reviewing different mission requests, providing feedback and evaluations, and giving approvals to move a vote. You can check this in my profile activity.
For the voting phase, a new proposed upgrade and vote for approval of mission requests took place; here our rationale:
Upgrade Proposal # 4
Upgrade Proposal # 4 Protocol Upgrade
At the SEED Latam delegation, we are supportive of this proposed upgrade. Consequently, we vote FOR.
Mission Requests:
We vote for those who we believe will bring value to the Collective. When considering Intent # 1 , we also follow the criteria set by the Developer Advisory Board. For Intent # 2 and # 3 , we take into account the limited budget. As a result, we have voted in favor of the following Mission Requests:
For Intent # 1 : We voted for 1 A, 1 B, 1 C, 1 D, 1 E, 1 F
For Intent # 2 : We voted for 2 A, 2 B, 2 C, 2 D, 2 E, 2 F, 2 G, 2 H, 2 I, 2 K, 2 L
For Intent # 3 : We voted for 3 B, 3 D, 3 F, 3 G, 3 I, 3 J, 3 K, 3 L
For Intent # 4 : We voted for 4 A, 4 C, 4 E, 4 G 2 , 4 H, 4 I
Voting Cycle # 18 decisions During the first weeks of cycle 18 , the delegation was busy reviewin…
Voting Cycle # 18 decisions During the first weeks of cycle 18 , the delegation was busy reviewing different mission requests, providing feedback and evaluations, and giving approvals to move a vote. You can check this in my profile activity. For the voting phase, a new proposed upgrade and vote for approval of mission requests took place; here our rationale: Upgrade Proposal # 4 Upgrade Proposal # 4 Protocol Upgrade At the SEED Latam delegation, we are supportive of this proposed upgrade. Consequently, we vote FOR. Mission Requests: We vote for those who we believe will bring value to the Collective. When considering Intent # 1 , we also follow the criteria set by the Developer Advisory Board. For Intent # 2 and # 3 , we take into account the limited budget. As a result, we have voted in favor of the following Mission Requests: For Intent # 1 : We voted for 1 A, 1 B, 1 C, 1 D, 1 E, 1 F For Intent # 2 : We voted for 2 A, 2 B, 2 C, 2 D, 2 E, 2 F, 2 G, 2 H, 2 I, 2 K, 2 L For Intent # 3 : We voted for 3 B, 3 D, 3 F, 3 G, 3 I, 3 J, 3 K, 3 L For Intent # 4 : We voted for 4 A, 4 C, 4 E, 4 G 2 , 4 H, 4 I
Voting Cycle # 19 decisions
During this voting cycle, two upgrade proposals were put forward to th…
Voting Cycle # 19 decisions
During this voting cycle, two upgrade proposals were put forward to the Collective. At the SEED Latam delegation, we expressed our support for both proposals and, as a result, we voted in favor of them. To give you a quick summary, here’s an excerpt from the discussion threads with our reasonings:
Upgrade Proposal # 5 : Ecotone Network Upgrade 1
Upgrade Proposal # 5 : Ecotone Network Upgrade Protocol Upgrade
We’re voting FOR this proposal.
We support the update of OP Mainnet to post data to this new Ethereum instance (blobspace). For years, the entire community has eagerly awaited and comprehended the benefits for the UX side that EIP- 4844 offer, while security designs have been carefully taken into account by so many development teams. Additionally, we agree it is appropriate for OP Mainnet to follow the latest Ethereum mainnet specifications by adopting and adapting almost all the introduced chan…
Upgrade Proposal # 6 : Multi-Chain Prep (MCP) L 1
Upgrade Proposal # 6 : Multi-Chain Prep (MCP) L 1 Protocol Upgrade
We voted FOR this proposal.
The proposed upgrade, after reviewing it, we agree that its implementation accomplishes its goal of simplifying upgrade flows. It’s important to emphasize that the proposal has already explained how it impacts sensitive aspects of chain security, based on the framework previously mentioned. We strongly believe that any new issues identified before the implementation phase, not just the critical ones, should be communicated transparently to the community. We advocate …
Voting Cycle # 19 decisions During this voting cycle, two upgrade proposals were put forward to th…
Voting Cycle # 19 decisions During this voting cycle, two upgrade proposals were put forward to the Collective. At the SEED Latam delegation, we expressed our support for both proposals and, as a result, we voted in favor of them. To give you a quick summary, here’s an excerpt from the discussion threads with our reasonings: Upgrade Proposal # 5 : Ecotone Network Upgrade 1 Upgrade Proposal # 5 : Ecotone Network Upgrade Protocol Upgrade We’re voting FOR this proposal. We support the update of OP Mainnet to post data to this new Ethereum instance (blobspace). For years, the entire community has eagerly awaited and comprehended the benefits for the UX side that EIP- 4844 offer, while security designs have been carefully taken into account by so many development teams. Additionally, we agree it is appropriate for OP Mainnet to follow the latest Ethereum mainnet specifications by adopting and adapting almost all the introduced chan… Upgrade Proposal # 6 : Multi-Chain Prep (MCP) L 1 Upgrade Proposal # 6 : Multi-Chain Prep (MCP) L 1 Protocol Upgrade We voted FOR this proposal. The proposed upgrade, after reviewing it, we agree that its implementation accomplishes its goal of simplifying upgrade flows. It’s important to emphasize that the proposal has already explained how it impacts sensitive aspects of chain security, based on the framework previously mentioned. We strongly believe that any new issues identified before the implementation phase, not just the critical ones, should be communicated transparently to the community. We advocate …
1 ) Voting Cycle # 21 decisions
Two proposals were presented for consideration: a) Improved Advanc…
1 ) Voting Cycle # 21 decisions
Two proposals were presented for consideration: a) Improved Advanced Delegation, which is a protocol update for the Optimism governor, and b) Intent Budget Proposal # 2 1 , aimed at reallocating Season 5 Intents funds. Both were approved to proceed to a vote. We voted FOR the first proposal and abstained from voting on the second one. Details are posted below:
a) Proposal: Improve advanced delegation voting
Proposal: Improve advanced delegation voting Protocol Upgrade
We voted FOR this proposal.
On-chain voting procedures should be as abstracted as possible, regardless of the complexity of the governor designed. This upgrade is a step in the right direction. After reviewing the proposal, its proposed changes, and the audit report, we believe it is appropriate to proceed.
b) Season 5 : Intents Budget Proposal # 2 1
Season 5 : Intents Budget Proposal # 2 ? Token House Governance
We’re abstaining from the vote on this one, as I am a member of the Grants Council.
2 ) Token House participation and incentives: 2 nd Report
We have delivered the 2 nd Token House participation and incentives Report 4 , intending to provide digested quantitative information and relevant insights to track governance activity across seasons. This report focuses on the first half of Season 5 . Comments and feedback over the topics raised and report itself are welcomed.
Token House participation and incentives: Season 5 (Cycle 16 - 19 ) ? Token House Governance
During the previous season, we conducted a report that served as a reference for measuring participation in Governance (you can see it here).
First of all, we want to acknowledge the contributions of @dmars 300 , @brichis, and @lavande, whose insightful feedback has enriched this report.
In Season 5 , our team lead by Joxes and members @Pumbi, @AxlVaz, and @delphine have been working on this report, which, like the previous one, aims to provide information to evaluate the progress of our Optimism…
For a look at our previous report targeting Season 4 , please read here.
3 ) Comments and feedback
Lastly, we have been analyzing the progress of Season 5 as well as the new announcements made by the Optimism Foundation. We have provided important comments and raised some questions. Please see below to follow the discussion:
Season 5 Feedback Thread
Season 5 Feedback Thread Metagovernance
Now that we’re in the second half of Season 5 , I have crafted some feedback to consider during the upcoming reflection period and the next season.
Procedures
On Protocol upgrades:
In line with the suggestions made by Polynya here, in the future, any protocol upgrade proposals should be voted on at a more measured pace, for instance, a maximum of one per voting cycle. Unless they are deemed critical upgrades or subjected to a one-package release, users should not be subjected to multiple chan…
Upcoming Retro rounds and their design 1
Upcoming Retro rounds and their design ? RetroPGF
This is a rationale for the delegation of SEED Latam, discussed among @Joxes, @Pumbi, @habacuc.eth and @delphine and we are sharing it below.
We agree with the new approach of conducting specific scope rounds as we consider it to be simpler both for applicants when participating, as well as for badge holders when evaluating. Additionally, having the calendar in advance provides predictability to when builders would be potentially rewarded for their positive impacts on the Collective.
Rewardi…
Introducing the Collective Feedback Commission 1
Introducing the Collective Feedback Commission Metagovernance
This is a rationale from the SEED Latam delegation that we have been evaluating with @Joxes, @Pumbi, @AxlVaz, @delphine, and @habacuc.eth , which we are sharing below.
We are looking forward to the CFC, a step to strengthen and improve the processes of collecting qualitative feedback from the community, which is important for the iteration of Measure & Analyze. Given its novelty, we have some questions about how it will function:
What types of commitments do CFC members have towards the commu…
SEED Latam Delegation: What’s Coming in Season 6
It’s been two years since we launched our first…
SEED Latam Delegation: What’s Coming in Season 6
It’s been two years since we launched our first delegation in SEED Latam (formerly DeFi LATAM) on Optimism. In the beginning, our vision 1 as both a community and individuals was to bring a community voice from this part of the world to help scale Ethereum.
Since that initial statement, we have evolved as an organization alongside the Optimism Collective and actively contributed to the growth of the collective in our region. Throughout 2022 , 2023 , and 2024 , we’ve organized over 18 open governance meetings in Spanish with more than 161 participants, where we shared updates and discussed all governance proposals. Our main goal was to engage the community in governance while promoting the Optimistic Vision.
SEED Latam and our delegations have always promoted collective participation. In addition to the public meetings we’ve organized, many collaborators have contributed to this delegation and the Optimism Collective.
With everything mentioned above, we reaffirm our commitment to the Optimistic Vision and the Collective. We will continue to contribute as an organization to governance, but we believe some changes are necessary as we approach Season 6 and new directions on governance are ahead.
A slight change in our objectives
In this new transition, we want to focus on contributing to the path towards metagovernance, particularly in the new governance processes. We understand that this new direction is crucial for the decentralization of the protocol and the future of governance, and we want to contribute to achieving this mission.
SEEDGov Delegation, a step on our working methodology
The SEEDLatam delegation in Optimism has always worked with contributors, meaning that our contributions to the collective are collaborative. This is why we want to deepen this methodology that we’ve been implementing by taking the next step. Starting from Season 6 , we will formalize our operations as a platform (similar to Synthetix, L 2 beat, GFXLabs, etc.), led by @joxes in collaboration with @SEEDGov,@axlvaz, @habacuc.eth, @delphine, and @Pumbi. This methodology aims to maintain the delegation’s activity and contributions in each new vertical the collective explores.
It is worth mentioning that this new approach that is being implemented by the delegation accompanies a broader reorganization of the SEEDOrg 1 collective. SEEDGov is the first delegation platform in Latam founded on community values. It will continue to operate as a vertical focused on decentralized governance in the web 3 space, emphasizing active participation, community engagement, decision-making, and experimentation, creating capable teams focused on the emerging needs of DAOs and protocols.
Future ahead
With these changes, we aim to deepen our participation and commitment to the Optimism Collective. We strive to serve as perpetual contributors, providing value in the best possible way, and positively impacting the decision-making process within the governance structure. Let’s work together to achieve the Superchain future we all envision.
Cycle # 23 a
Below, we present the rationale from the SEED Latam delegation for our voting during c…
Cycle # 23 a
Below, we present the rationale from the SEED Latam delegation for our voting during cycle # 23 a.
Protocol Upgrade # 7 : Fault Proofs 2 : Abstained.
[FINAL] Protocol Upgrade # 7 : Fault Proofs
After carefully reviewing the proposal, we decided to abstain as a way to differentiate from a straightforward vote FOR. This is because we highly value the reputational risk involved with this proposal and want to minimize it. This means that in our assessment, Fault Proofs definitely need to happen at some point, but considering other security contests that are set to launch in the coming weeks, it makes sense to us that Fault Proofs deployment is not yet necessary. We believe that Fault Proofs as a whole, and the measures taken at the design level to convert OP Mainnet into a Stage 1 rollup, are correct. While the Guardian Role still holds central power, the setup designed around it makes sense to accomplish their expected function.
Finally, as we always emphasize, we hope that any findings regarding the Fault Proof protocol that could compromise its functionality or require alterations to its proposed design will be promptly communicated and the upgrade rescheduled accordingly.
Upgrade # 8 : Guardian, Security Council Threshold and L 2 ProxyAdmin Ownership changes for Stage 1 Decentralization: In favor.
[FINAL] Protocol Upgrade # 8 : Guardian, Security Council Threshold and L 2 ProxyAdmin Ownership changes for Stage 1 Decentralization
We believe it is important to continue moving towards the decentralization of the Guardian, as we see the role as a single point of failure. However, we consider beneficial increasing the Security Council Safe’s signing threshold from 4 to 10 out of 13 , as this reduces the risk of having a single point of failure.
Governor Update Proposal # 2 : Improvements to advanced delegation allowance calculations: In favor.
[FINAL] Governor Update Proposal # 2 : Improvements to advanced delegation allowance calculations
This changes on the governor goes to the right direction, we’re happy to see live such improvements and requested features.
Code of Conduct Council (CoCC) Operating Budget for Season 6 : Against.
[FINAL] Code of Conduct Council (CoCC) Operating Budget for Season 6
After carefully reviewing the proposal, we’ve noted several considerations to make this decision. While we acknowledge the efforts made to refine the CoC, we do not find these changes sufficient to warrant the proposed budget increase and grow their structure. We believe that the increase in the budget and the number of members is not justified by the activities during Season 5 . This proposed structure looks more like a experiment, but worth to explore under other processes (let’s say ad-honorem positions to be rewared via retroPGF if they have success). Therefore, not enough arguments are provided to makes this change reasonable to approve, or at least explaining the risks associated for Season 6 if no changes are made (let’s say, leaving the CoC Council as it).
Season 6 : Intents Ratification: In favor on both ratification and budget proposals.
Season 6 : Intents Ratification
We think the scope for Intent 1 makes sense for now, as aligning Optimism’s goals with core developers and external teams might be challenging when referring to OP Stack development. In this regard, the work accumulated in Season 5 suffices for now and demostrate how difficult is to find alignment. Thus, we believe the GovFund making focus on decentralizing governance processes is reasonable. Regarding Intents 2 , we agree that we’re currently in the stage where the efforts must be done from a very well-focused strategy. and for Intents 3 , clearly pushing for more developer growth within the Superchain and launching applications is very positive and need to continue. About budgets, they seem appropriate for us and we have no comments in this regard.
Season 6 : Developer Advisory Board Renewal: voting for Zach Obront.
Zach Obront - Developer Advisory Board Operating Budget
The budget for the DAB was 70 k in season 5 , while now a budget between 90 k and 122 k is being requested. Therefore, the percentage increases compared to the previous season’s budget range from 28 . 57 % to 74 . 29 %. Ed Mazurek’s option offers timely feedback on technical issues. Although the DAB’s comments were very general and focused only on the winning proposals, we are not entirely sure that the additional amount requested justifies the increases. By evaluating all the arits: expertise, previous involvement, budget requested, proposed work structure and KPIs, looks appropiate for this Season.
We want to thank the efforts made by Ed Mazurek, happy to keep seeing him involved in other instances in the governance.
Season 6 : Grants Council Operating Budget: In favor.
Season 6 Grants Council Operating Budget Proposal
We believe that the changes in the Council structure, with a total of 18 members, represent a significant step in the right direction. We think that the addition of new roles, such as audit reviewers, can help lighten the workload of the current reviewers. The proposed 610 k OP for operational expenses is higher than what was approved in the previous season, but considering that there will be at least 3 rounds during season 6 (each lasting between 3 and 4 weeks), unlike the 2 rounds in season 5 , we understand that this increase may be necessary since more applications are expected throughout the 3 rounds.
Cycle # 23 b
Below, we present the rationale from the SEED Latam delegation for our voting during c…
Cycle # 23 b
Below, we present the rationale from the SEED Latam delegation for our voting during cycle # 23 b.
Season 6 : Anticapture Commission Amendment: In favor.
After a review, we agree with the updates for this commission and we believe they are heading in the right direction for the upcoming season.
(Final) V 2 . Code of Conduct Council Operating budget re-scope for season 6 . (cycle 23 b): In favor.
Although we believe the budget is still slightly high, we think it is important for this commission to have continuity, as we mentioned below.
(Final) V 2 . Code of Conduct Council Operating budget re-scope for season 6 . (cycle 23 b)
As we mentioned before, we recognize the importance of the work carried out by this body. That’s why we noted that the negative vote decision leans more towards budget issues rather than the council’s management itself.
We acknowledge and value the efforts made to refine the Code of Conduct and recognize that the budget reduction of 17 , 000 OP is significant, but we believe the total value of the operating budget remains high.
Upgrade Proposal # 9 : Fjord Network Upgrade: In favor.
we consider the changes very reasonable and the benefits are clearly explained as we discussed below.
Upgrade Proposal # 9 : Fjord Network Upgrade
After commenting on this upgrade with @Joxes and the SEED Latam delegation, we are thrilled by its versatility, efficiency, and resilience. From expanding the possibility of signing from any device to its significant impact on Data Availability and protocol-level efficiency, the Fjord upgrade brings a lot to the network.
Season 6 : Chain Delegation Program Amendment: In favor.
Given our current context, this program seems appropriate to relauch.
Season 6 Elections: Developer Advisory Board: Voting for devtooligan, wildmolasses, wbnns, blockdev, anika, merklefruit and noah.eth.
It has been challenging to select only five nominees, given the impressive skills and track record presented by each member. We have chosen these seven candidates, and we greatly thank the rest for their nomination.
Grants Council Reviewer Elections: Mission Reviewer: Voting for katie, Jrocki, Michael, mastermojo, GFXlabs, MattL, jackanorak, MoneyManDoug, brichis, habacuc.eth via seedlatam, Tane and Antoine.
Grants Council S 6 Election Town Hall
We have voted for @MattL, @Michael, @mastermojo, @GFXlabs, @jackanorak,@MoneyManDoug and @katie, who were members of the Grants Council last season and all did an excellent job. They will be key to maintaining outstanding performance in Season 6 . Additionally, we have chosen @brichis, @Jrocki, Tane and Antoine for their combination of experience and alignment with Optimism. Finally, we voted for our candidate @habacuc.eth, who brings significant context from working internally with Joxes at the Grants Council during Season 5 , along with a technical background related to the OP Stack. He is well-prepared to represent SEED Latam in this role.
Grants Council Reviewer Elections: Milestones and Metrics Reviewer: Voting for Juanbug_PGov, mmurthy and v 3 naru_Curia.
Grants Council S 6 Election Town Hall
We vote for mmurthy, v 3 naru_Curia and Juanbug_PGov because they participated in the Milestones and Metrics subcommittee of the Grants Council in previous seasons. Considering their positive performance and the necessary context and experience they have for the challenge of the new season, we reelect them for this season.
Grants Council Reviewer Elections: Audit Reviewer: Voting for m 4 rio.eth and leo.sagan via seedlatam.
Grants Council S 6 Election Town Hall
We vote for m 4 rio.eth and leo.sagan because both possess the technical knowledge required for the position.
Cycle # 24
Below, we present the rationale from the SEED Latam delegation for our voting during cy…
Cycle # 24
Below, we present the rationale from the SEED Latam delegation for our voting during cycle # 24 .
At SEED Latam, we have selected mission requests that, in our opinion, have an appropriate scope and potential beneficial outcome for the stage Optimism is currently in.
Mission Requests: Intent # 1 , 500 k OP: we have voted for
[Mission Request] Cross Chain Voting
[Mission Request] Grants Claiming Tool
[Mission Request] Analysis of Grant Programs
[Mission Request] Voting Analysis
[Mission Request] Farcaster social graph
[Mission Request] Develop non-technical solutions for increasing both voter and token participation in the DAO
[Mission Request] Integration of Optimism Gov and RPGF into University Courses
Mission Requests: Intent # 3 A, 6 M OP: we have voted for
[Mission Request] Optimism Dominance in Yield-Bearing Assets ( 1 of 4 )
[Mission Request] Optimism Dominance in Yield-Bearing Assets ( 2 of 4 )
[Mission Request] Optimism Dominance in Yield-Bearing Assets ( 3 of 4 )
[Mission Request] Optimism Dominance in Yield-Bearing Assets ( 4 of 4 )
[Mission Request] Subsidized Audit Grants
[Mission Request] Developer Tools
[Mission Request] - Research capital migration to the Superchain
[Mission Request] Microgrants for Experimental Projects
[Mission Request] ERC- 4337 Data & Attribution Standards for the Superchain
[Mission Request] Sequencer commitment games
[MISSION REQUEST] Open-source transaction simulator
[Mission Request] Increase project accounts
[Mission Request] Support on-chain games close to launch
[MISSION REQUEST] Startup Support - Optimism as Venture Studio
[Mission Request] Gaming Infra in the Superchain
[Mission Request] Marquee governance hackathon
[Mission Request] Accelerating Game Development in the Superchain 1
Mission Requests: Intent # 3 B, 12 M OP
[Mission Request]: Intent # 3 B: Support the Superchain : we have voted for this proposal as the way to enlarge and accelerate the Superchain grow.
Cycle # 26
Below, we present the rationale for our voting during cycle # 26 .
Security Council E…
Cycle # 26
Below, we present the rationale for our voting during cycle # 26 .
Security Council Elections: Cohort A Lead: FOR @alisha.eth
At SEEDGov, we have decided to vote for Alisha as Lead again because we believe she has performed well in Season 5 . We value her experience and understanding of the role, which is why we support her re-election for this term.
Security Council Elections: Cohort A Members: We voted FOR:
@ethernaut
@yoseph
@pablito.eth
@nanexcool
@kent (Agora)
@emiliano
@eek 637 (Uniswap Foundation)
We raised concerns about the number of positions available for the Security Council, as the forum mentioned 7 positions, while the vote and town hall referenced only 6 . Therefore, from the start, we decided to vote for seven members. We have selected what we believe are the best candidates for the Security Council based on their expertise, reputation, geographic and jurisdictional diversity, and the unique value they bring to the role. We would also like to thank all applicants for their interest in being part of such an important role.
Upgrade Proposal # 10 : Granite Network Upgrade 1 : In favor.
To explain why we made this decision, we want to give some background and share our thoughts.
Background
The Fault Proof proposal was introduced three months ago. The upgrade included one of the most anticipated implementations: real fraud proofs. However, the proposal included two key aspects that raised many questions and doubts about the actual impact and risk of the upgrade: the lack of a complete audit of the system and the conception of the Guardian roles as a consequence.
Amid various concerns and questions, a key comment by Zach was raised regarding the risks introduced by this upgrade; most of them were understood by us within the “reputational risk” category, as the Guardian role was specifically set to minimize any existential risk. For us, our position was to abstain due to the present risk, aligning with the opinion of the DAB leader. We highly value the minimization of reputational risk. Nevertheless, the Collective sent a strong signal in favor of the upgrade.
Granite
As detailed, bugs were found, which was certainly an expected outcome given the circumstances. Most of the fixes are related to the findings identified in the audit results. In order to move forward, that is, to return to the mode where fault proofs are fully operational, these fixes need to be implemented.
Implementing this upgrade should objectively move us to a safer stage than before, prior to the permissioned mode being triggered. However, it is mentioned how complex Fault Proofs are, so more bugs could still be present. As the safeguards are assumed to be well-audited and managed by the Security Council and Foundation, it should be acceptable to continue having the system as is, even though there are multiple concerns about its design, implementation, and maturity.
Going ahead
All the discussions across various instances about this upgrade have left us with several points to consider for the Collective:
Highlight the importance of the Developer Advisory Board in keeping delegates well-informed and, in a sense, making recommendations and outlining expected outcomes for each possible choice. Also, all delegates should ensure that every aspect of protocol upgrade proposals is sufficiently understood before offering support.
The preference for more conservative measures has been expressed by some members of the Collective that should be taken into account. In a scenario where Audits vs. Shipping, the balance might lean more towards the former.
Related to point ( 2 ), the Collective should revisit the Audit Framework, as the sense of reputational risk could be more highly valued than the current version suggests.
Expectations on what the Fault Proof roadmap should look like, including the communication of the current constraints and challenges around it and how the system should evolve, regardless of the approach to a multi-proof system.
The pertinent disclosure of how the running and monitoring of the system actually work, and which nice-to-have features would be appropriate to encourage, for governance’s awareness. This includes any action that could favor the redundancy of the system’s monitoring.
Voting Cycle # 27 Decisions
Below, we provide the rationale behind our voting decisions for Cycle …
Voting Cycle # 27 Decisions
Below, we provide the rationale behind our voting decisions for Cycle # 27 .
FOR:
Request 1 : Subsidized Audit Grants V 2 1
This proposal is a continuation of the audit program, and we support its extension as it aligns with the broader goals of ensuring security and trust within the ecosystem.
Request 2 : Experimentation of Infrastructure Subsidies
This initiative builds on a previous effort from Season 4 , subsidizing critical infrastructure such as RPCs, oracles, and explorers. Supporting infrastructure subsidies encourages more projects to join the Superchain, and we are in favor of this Mission Request.
Request 4 : Crosschain Alert Monitoring
This system aims to monitor delays or issues in message passing between sequencers. While these delays don’t compromise chain security, they affect usability. Having this monitoring system ready ahead of interoperability is crucial, and we fully support it.
Request 6 : Decentralized Solvers and Aggregators on OP Mainnet / Superchain
We find this Mission Request reasonable, as it promotes interoperability for decentralized aggregators, a key element for the Superchain’s growth.
Request 7 : Targeted Extension of Superfest
We support this initiative as it contributes to the continued engagement and promotion of ecosystem activities.
Regarding Request 3 : Superchain Borrow/Lend Aggregator we have raised concerns regarding the funding amount for this Mission Request and are currently withholding our vote. While the mission can be executed within one year, it is dependent on interoperability, which might consume valuable development time. We prefer to wait until the interoperability standard is fully effective before implementing this mission.
About Request 8 Optimism Full Financial Audit, we believe it cannot proceed without the support of the Foundation or OP Labs. Since the treasury operates on-chain and payments are managed by a multisig that requires verification from the Foundation, we abstain from voting on it.
We are excited to share with the Collective our relaunch: we are now SEEDGov!
From SEED Latam to SE…
We are excited to share with the Collective our relaunch: we are now SEEDGov!
From SEED Latam to SEED Org: About a broader reorganization into SEEDGov, SEEDNode and SEED Latam
As SEED Latam evolved, so has our scope. We grew from a community into SEED Org, an organization with three key verticals: SEEDGov is our Delegate Platform, the first Latam-based platform actively engaged in governance activities; SEEDNodes focuses on nodes infrastructure and education services; and SEED Latam, our original branch, is centered on communities, collaboration hubs, and knowledge-sharing, hosting online initiatives. We invite you to know more about us here 1 . For this reason, the rebranding to SEEDGov reflects our aim to streamline our structure—SEEDGov focuses on governance, while SEED Latam continues with community-driven initiatives. This distinction helps clarify our identity, both internally and externally.
Our early days:
Before delving into the details of this rebranding, let’s take a brief look at our journey. The SEED Latam delegation in Optimism has always embraced a collaborative approach, with contributions from various members along the way. Throughout this journey ,we’ve been fortunate to have the support of several collaborators across past seasons. Our delegation in Optimism has worked to spread knowledge about Optimism within the Spanish-speaking community, primarily in Latin America. We’ve taken this effort further by actively involving the community in the delegation’s decisions and voting. You can read more about this in our articles The Social Consensus of SEED Latam and The composition of the SEED Latam delegates vote.
Adapting to Optimism’s iteration:
Optimism continually evolves with new structures, roles, and responsibilities each season. To keep pace, we have expanded and reorganized our team, ensuring that we can contribute in all the directions the Collective is growing. Our deep understanding of the OP stack and governance mechanisms enables us to align our work seamlessly with the needs of the protocol, builders, and end-users, thus making meaningful contributions to the community. As a result, we’ve consolidated a team with specific roles that operates horizontally. Our team is composed of @Joxes as tech researcher -who participated in the Grants Council for the Builders vertical during S 5 ; @Pumbi as governance analyst-collaborator on Token House participation and incentives: Season 5 (Cycle 16 - 19 ) and member of the Code of Conduct Council S 6 ; @delphine e as coordinator and @Fehz as governance lead of SEEDGov, the delegation platform of SEED Org. Additionally, we are collaborating with partners like Zenbit for developing tools.
Today: A Governance Platform
Amid Season 6 , we are at a key moment of crystallizing this methodology and continue to operate horizontally, where each member tackles a specific role, functioning as a platform similar to others in the ecosystem.
Finally, in line with this evolution, we are pleased to announce that you will now find us on the forum as SEEDGov. Additionally, we will soon change our ENS to SEEDGov (op.seedgov.eth).
delegacion op 1500 × 600 56 KB
