Hello all! We are the blockchain club at the University of Southern California.
Our delegate address is: 0 x 995013 B 47 EF 3 A 2 B 07 b 9 e 60 dA 6 D 1 fFf 8 fa 9 C 53 Cf 4 4
Here’s what we stand for:
Mission: In our role as a delegate, we strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.
Values:
Consistent
Having integrity
Community-centric
Sustainable
Thoughtful and researched
Transparent
Constructively critical
Within this thread we will be communicating our voting rationale, and other important updates about our work.
Summary: The post introduces the blockchain club at the University of Southern California, providing their delegate address and outlining their mission and values. They aim to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful decision-making and community engagement. The club will share their voting rationale and updates on their work in this thread.
Hello all! We are the blockchain club at the University of Southern California.
Our delegate addres…
Hello all! We are the blockchain club at the University of Southern California.
Our delegate address is: 0 x 995013 B 47 EF 3 A 2 B 07 b 9 e 60 dA 6 D 1 fFf 8 fa 9 C 53 Cf 4
Here’s what we stand for:
Mission: In our role as a delegate, we strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.
Values:
Consistent
Having integrity
Community-centric
Sustainable
Thoughtful and researched
Transparent
Constructively critical
Within this thread we will be communicating our voting rationale, and other important updates about our work.
Bedrock
We voted FOR
Bedrock is an important step in the progression of Optimism’s technology. We …
Bedrock
We voted FOR
Bedrock is an important step in the progression of Optimism’s technology. We believe the Foundation and OP Labs have done a thorough job of making sure the upgrade is secure and reliable, and we believe they will continue to do so, only implementing it when the time is right.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. Bedrock contributes to the improvement of web 3 infrastructure.
Primary decision-maker: @chaselb
Fractal Visions Delegate Suspension
We voted ABSTAIN
We do not believe that we are provided enough information to vote on this decision. There is no evidence provided by the foundation to help us make this decision, simply the verification of evidence existing by the foundation. This means that a vote FOR or AGAINST is simply whether or not we trust the foundation to be acting honestly and fairly in their representation of the code of conduct violation. We believe that as this process stands now, any decision made by us on the subject would neither be thoughtful nor researched.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. A decision here would neither be thoughtful nor researched, and thus we abstained.
Primary decision-maker: @chaselb
Hello all! We are the blockchain club at the University of Southern California. Our delegate addres…
Hello all! We are the blockchain club at the University of Southern California. Our delegate address is: 0 x 995013 B 47 EF 3 A 2 B 07 b 9 e 60 dA 6 D 1 fFf 8 fa 9 C 53 Cf 4 2 Here’s what we stand for: Mission: In our role as a delegate, we strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement. Values: Consistent Having integrity Community-centric Sustainable Thoughtful and researched Transparent Constructively critical Within this thread we will be communicating our voting rationale, and other important updates about our work.
Bedrock We voted FOR Bedrock is an important step in the progression of Optimism’s technology. We …
Bedrock We voted FOR Bedrock is an important step in the progression of Optimism’s technology. We believe the Foundation and OP Labs have done a thorough job of making sure the upgrade is secure and reliable, and we believe they will continue to do so, only implementing it when the time is right. Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” Yes. Bedrock contributes to the improvement of web 3 infrastructure. Primary decision-maker: @chaselb Fractal Visions Delegate Suspension We voted ABSTAIN We do not believe that we are provided enough information to vote on this decision. There is no evidence provided by the foundation to help us make this decision, simply the verification of evidence existing by the foundation. This means that a vote FOR or AGAINST is simply whether or not we trust the foundation to be acting honestly and fairly in their representation of the code of conduct violation. We believe that as this process stands now, any decision made by us on the subject would neither be thoughtful nor researched. Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” Yes. A decision here would neither be thoughtful nor researched, and thus we abstained. Primary decision-maker: @chaselb
Council Reviewer Elections: Growth Experiments Grants
We voted for: Katie Garcia, Matt L, StableL…
Council Reviewer Elections: Growth Experiments Grants
We voted for: Katie Garcia, Matt L, StableLabs, Michael Vander Meiden, and GFX
We used a rubric, taking into consideration the following categories:
Dedication to Optimism ( 0 to 6 points): self explanatory. Are they uniquely committed to the optimism ecosystem? Have they put in work to improve it?
Expertise ( 0 to 5 points): do they have expertise that would be useful in this council?
Originality/Strength of Ideas ( 0 to 3 points): did they present strong, well thought out, and original ideas ideas in their application?
Governance distribution ( 0 to 2 points): we awarded points here if the candidate was NOT a large delegate. We believe it is important to distribute governance power, and would like to propel those who otherwise put in the work but don’t have large delegation
We then voted for the top 5 people according to this rubric (since this council has five total spots). If you were a candidate and are curious on how we graded you, please reach out!
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. We believe that the rubric we used to consider the candidates is in accordance with this mission.
Council Reviewer Elections: Builders Grants
We voted for: Gonna.eth, Jack Anorak, and Krzysztof Urbanski (kaereste or krst)
We used the same rubric as above. We then voted for the top three people (since this council has three total spots).
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. We believe that the rubric we used to consider the candidates is in accordance with this mission.
Treasury Appropriation (Foundation Year 2 Budget Approval)
We voted ABSTAIN
We believe that votes should hold weight. They should be specific, and result in some sort of action or ratification. They should allow for the collective to decide on how optimism moves forward. This vote was none of those things, and thus we do not feel it appropriate (or necessary) for us to vote one way or another. We echo the sentiment of other delegates: if the Foundation would like community feedback, then ask for feedback. Voting (especially on-chain votes which cost money) is for actual decisions.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. We believe that this decision helps promote more effective community ownership and governance.
Inflation Adjustment Proposal
We voted FOR
We believe it wise to set the inflation to 0 %, especially in this time of rapid increased token circulation, and then make data-driven adjustments as time goes on. However, we would like to note that we are not experts in the area of tokenomics, and only felt comfortable voting FOR in this case as 0 % inflation is a neutral position to hold right now, and also because it is fairly inconsequential due to the plans for increased token supply in the near future (you can read more about why this vote is fairly inconsequential on the original proposal post).
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
As explained above, we are not experts in tokenomics, but this decision was thoughtfully made in order to force future adjustments in token inflation beyond 0 % to be voted on, where we (and hopefully others) can and will encourage those adjustment proposals to be backed by data driven research.
Primary Decision Makers: @chaselb @sator
Council Reviewer Elections: Growth Experiments Grants We voted for: Katie Garcia, Matt L, StableL…
Council Reviewer Elections: Growth Experiments Grants We voted for: Katie Garcia, Matt L, StableLabs, Michael Vander Meiden, and GFX We used a rubric, taking into consideration the following categories: Dedication to Optimism ( 0 to 6 points): self explanatory. Are they uniquely committed to the optimism ecosystem? Have they put in work to improve it? Expertise ( 0 to 5 points): do they have expertise that would be useful in this council? Originality/Strength of Ideas ( 0 to 3 points): did they present strong, well thought out, and original ideas ideas in their application? Governance distribution ( 0 to 2 points): we awarded points here if the candidate was NOT a large delegate. We believe it is important to distribute governance power, and would like to propel those who otherwise put in the work but don’t have large delegation We then voted for the top 5 people according to this rubric (since this council has five total spots). If you were a candidate and are curious on how we graded you, please reach out! Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” Yes. We believe that the rubric we used to consider the candidates is in accordance with this mission. Council Reviewer Elections: Builders Grants We voted for: Gonna.eth, Jack Anorak, and Krzysztof Urbanski (kaereste or krst) We used the same rubric as above. We then voted for the top three people (since this council has three total spots). Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” Yes. We believe that the rubric we used to consider the candidates is in accordance with this mission. Treasury Appropriation (Foundation Year 2 Budget Approval) We voted ABSTAIN We believe that votes should hold weight. They should be specific, and result in some sort of action or ratification. They should allow for the collective to decide on how optimism moves forward. This vote was none of those things, and thus we do not feel it appropriate (or necessary) for us to vote one way or another. We echo the sentiment of other delegates: if the Foundation would like community feedback, then ask for feedback. Voting (especially on-chain votes which cost money) is for actual decisions. Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” Yes. We believe that this decision helps promote more effective community ownership and governance. Inflation Adjustment Proposal We voted FOR We believe it wise to set the inflation to 0 %, especially in this time of rapid increased token circulation, and then make data-driven adjustments as time goes on. However, we would like to note that we are not experts in the area of tokenomics, and only felt comfortable voting FOR in this case as 0 % inflation is a neutral position to hold right now, and also because it is fairly inconsequential due to the plans for increased token supply in the near future (you can read more about why this vote is fairly inconsequential on the original proposal post). Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” As explained above, we are not experts in tokenomics, but this decision was thoughtfully made in order to force future adjustments in token inflation beyond 0 % to be voted on, where we (and hopefully others) can and will encourage those adjustment proposals to be backed by data driven research. Primary Decision Makers: @chaselb @sator
Mission Proposals
Intent # 1
We approved:
Superchain Deepdive
Reason: Superchain is on the roadmap…
Mission Proposals
Intent # 1
We approved:
Superchain Deepdive
Reason: Superchain is on the roadmap of Optimism, and there needs to be an initiative be in place for progressive decentralization
Reviewer: @Sator
TechNERD Program
Reason: Technical education inside Optimism are essential
Reviewer: @Sator
Extend the L 1 Block contract to store historical blockhash data
Reason: Access to historical data allows for further decentralization
Reviewer: @Sator
Spearbit + Immunefi Bug Bounty Program for Large Protocols on Optimism
Reason: Security is of paramount importance to the Optimism ecosystem, particularly for large protocols such as Velodrome.
Reviewer: @chaselb
We did not approve:
Fully Decentralized and Independent Oracle and Data Infrastructure
Reason: Through consulting with more technical members of our club, we do not believe that this is a practical enough solution considering the request asked for.
Reviewer: @sator
Future-proofing UI/UX of OP nodes
Reason: The timeline for this proposal appeared to be out of scope of the restrictions imposed upon Mission Proposals.
Reviewer: @chaselb
Intent # 3
We approved:
Velodrome: Spread Awareness Through Direct Outreach and Onboarding
Reason: Attracting more protocols to the biggest DEX on $OP would definitely bring attention to the OP vision across the DeFi space.
Reviewer: @sator
BanklessDAO’s Global Campaign to spread the Optimistic vision
Reason: BanklessDAO is a cost-effective platform for the intent
Reviewer: @sator
Create and Maintain the ‘Optimism Vision Reservoir’
Reason: Resource Aggregator on Optimism Vision is an essential for spreading the OP Vision.
Reviewer: @sator
Optimistic Womxn Shinning in Blockchain
Reason: Education + Building in Cohort Style for the LATAM woman community makes sense.
Reviewer: @sator
Let’s take the Optimistic Vision to LATAM with Espacio Cripto
Reason: Education for the LATAM community makes sense.
Reviewer: @sator
Spread Optimistic values across Latam with Solow
Reason: Spreading Optimistic values to diverse communities is important and the ask seems reasonable.
Reviewer: @chaselb
‘Thank Optimism - powered by ThriveCoin’
Reason: https://gov.optimism.io/t/final-thank-optimism-powered-by-thrivecoin/ 6104 / 56
Reviewer: @chaselb
Web 3 xplorer - A curated web platform to discover useful web 3 apps, resources and tools
Reason: https://gov.optimism.io/t/final-web 3 xplorer-a-curated-web-platform-to-discover-useful-web 3 -apps-resources-and-tools/ 6143 / 25 1
Reviewer: @chaselb
Rumbo Optimista - Hacia Ethereum Mexico The Event || Optimistic Road in the way to Ethereum México The Event
Reason: https://gov.optimism.io/t/final-rumbo-optimista-hacia-ethereum-mexico-the-event-optimistic-road-in-the-way-to-ethereum-mexico-the-event/ 6179 / 22
Reviewer: @chaselb
We did not approve:
Fueling RetroPGF Growth through Education, Collaboration, and Active Marketing
Reason: The initiatives in our opinion were too scattered for the mission proposal format.
Reviewer: @sator
Develop the most relevant and aligned audiovisual content for the Optimism Collective
Reason: [FINAL] Develop the most relevant and aligned audiovisual content for the Optimism Collective - # 25 by chaselb
Reviewer: @chaselb
Intent # 4
We approved:
Multi-lingual Lesson on Optimism Governance, by Bankless Academy
Reason: Bankless IP will be effective in increasing the Governance Accessibility
Reviewer: @sator
The RetroPGF Podcast
Reason: The blockchain guy youtube channel with 7 k+ followers and quality content will be effective in increasing the governance accessibility. Michael is also an experienced operator in internet native organization.
Reviewer: @sator
Delegate Corner Podcast
Reason: Experience under MetaFactory and especially podcast-related experience at Roll proves a legit track record Sinkas, and we believe they will be able to spread the voices of delegates of OP and enhance the governance accessibility
Reviewer: @sator
REGEN Score - Attestations for the Citizen’s House
Reason: Building out an on-chain reputation metric is aligned with the intent
Reviewer: @sator
Pairwise: Tinder UX For Web 3 Community Signaling
Reason: It will be a great tool for community signaling usage during the retroPGF voting period, and with an experienced team, we believe they will be able to ship it according to the listed milestone.
Reviewer: @sator
DAOStar: Governance standards for the Optimism ecosystem
Reason: [FINAL] DAOstar: Governance standards for the Optimism ecosystem - # 31 by chaselb
Reviewer: @chaselb
OP Governance Analytics Dashboard
Reason: [FINAL] OP Governance Analytics Dashboard - # 19 by chaselb
Reviewer: @chaselb
NumbaNERD Program
Reason: [FINAL] NumbaNERD program - # 10 by chaselb 1
Reviewer: @chaselb
We did not approve:
Improving Governance Accessibility through Praise and Contribution Based Attestations
Reason: At the time this proposal was already approved and we did not have strong feelings either way, thus we chose to abstain.
Reviewer: @sator
Economic Co-design of Gas Fees for the OP Stack
Reason: Interesting project but we also echo Linda’s point on the huge 125 k $OP ask (even with the 1 -year lock-up). Also we’d like to echo Bobby’s point that “OP Mainnet’s gas fees will not be subject to governance until a proposal type to do so is introduced in a future governance season”, and thus we abstain from this vote.
Reviewer: @sator
Velodrome: Fostering Inclusive Governance through Leading Optimism Builders and Long-term Users
Reason: [FINAL] Velodrome: Fostering Inclusive Governance through Leading Optimism Builders and Long-term Users - # 22 by chaselb
Reviewer: @chaselb
Enable aOP as A Votable Token in Optimism’s Governance
Reason: [FINAL] Enable aOP as A Votable Token in Optimism's Governance - # 22 by chaselb
Reviewer: @chaselb
OPdelegate.com
Reason: [FINAL] OPdelegate.com - # 17 by chaselb 1
Reviewer: @chaselb
Facilitate and empower community members to actively engage in governance through an educational course
Reason: [FINAL] Facilitate and empower community members to actively engage in governance through an educational course - # 11 by chaselb
Additional context: upon checking in with my co-lead, we both agreed that the course style is insufficient to address the stated problem.
Reviewer: @chaselb
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. We sought to approve proposals that maximized this goal in the best interests of the collective, and we conducted research and sought informed opinions where we didn’t have expertise.
Intent 2 Budget Proposal 2
We voted FOR
Reallocating left over budget from the Mission Proposal Process to an effective and well-run grants program seems like a no brainer. In the future we should try to conduct an analysis on the impact of the grants program on the collective, to better inform decisions like this.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. The grants program is an important avenue for the community to have impact on the Optimism ecosystem, and giving them access to more funds (that were allocated for the community to use anyways) enables the community have more impact on the ecosystem. The only drawback in the context of this mission statement is the potential for the grants council to be a centralizing force asking for more power, however, we believe this is a non-issue as we only are voting to give them leftover funds, and the request for these funds was well argued and justified.
Feel free to contact us with any questions, comments, or concerns about the way we have voted!
Mission Proposals
Intent # 1
We approved:
Superchain Deepdive
Reason: Superchain is on the roadmap…
Mission Proposals
Intent # 1
We approved:
Superchain Deepdive
Reason: Superchain is on the roadmap of Optimism, and there needs to be an initiative be in place for progressive decentralization
Reviewer: @Sator
TechNERD Program
Reason: Technical education inside Optimism are essential
Reviewer: @Sator
Extend the L 1 Block contract to store historical blockhash data
Reason: Access to historical data allows for further decentralization
Reviewer: @Sator
Spearbit + Immunefi Bug Bounty Program for Large Protocols on Optimism
Reason: Security is of paramount importance to the Optimism ecosystem, particularly for large protocols such as Velodrome.
Reviewer: @chaselb
We did not approve:
Fully Decentralized and Independent Oracle and Data Infrastructure
Reason: Through consulting with more technical members of our club, we do not believe that this is a practical enough solution considering the request asked for.
Reviewer: @sator
Future-proofing UI/UX of OP nodes
Reason: The timeline for this proposal appeared to be out of scope of the restrictions imposed upon Mission Proposals.
Reviewer: @chaselb
Intent # 3
We approved:
Velodrome: Spread Awareness Through Direct Outreach and Onboarding
Reason: Attracting more protocols to the biggest DEX on $OP would definitely bring attention to the OP vision across the DeFi space.
Reviewer: @sator
BanklessDAO’s Global Campaign to spread the Optimistic vision
Reason: BanklessDAO is a cost-effective platform for the intent
Reviewer: @sator
Create and Maintain the ‘Optimism Vision Reservoir’
Reason: Resource Aggregator on Optimism Vision is an essential for spreading the OP Vision.
Reviewer: @sator
Optimistic Womxn Shinning in Blockchain
Reason: Education + Building in Cohort Style for the LATAM woman community makes sense.
Reviewer: @sator
Let’s take the Optimistic Vision to LATAM with Espacio Cripto
Reason: Education for the LATAM community makes sense.
Reviewer: @sator
Spread Optimistic values across Latam with Solow
Reason: Spreading Optimistic values to diverse communities is important and the ask seems reasonable.
Reviewer: @chaselb
‘Thank Optimism - powered by ThriveCoin’
Reason: https://gov.optimism.io/t/final-thank-optimism-powered-by-thrivecoin/ 6104 / 56
Reviewer: @chaselb
Web 3 xplorer - A curated web platform to discover useful web 3 apps, resources and tools
Reason: https://gov.optimism.io/t/final-web 3 xplorer-a-curated-web-platform-to-discover-useful-web 3 -apps-resources-and-tools/ 6143 / 25
Reviewer: @chaselb
Rumbo Optimista - Hacia Ethereum Mexico The Event || Optimistic Road in the way to Ethereum México The Event
Reason: https://gov.optimism.io/t/final-rumbo-optimista-hacia-ethereum-mexico-the-event-optimistic-road-in-the-way-to-ethereum-mexico-the-event/ 6179 / 22
Reviewer: @chaselb
We did not approve:
Fueling RetroPGF Growth through Education, Collaboration, and Active Marketing
Reason: The initiatives in our opinion were too scattered for the mission proposal format.
Reviewer: @sator
Develop the most relevant and aligned audiovisual content for the Optimism Collective
Reason: [FINAL] Develop the most relevant and aligned audiovisual content for the Optimism Collective - # 25 by chaselb
Reviewer: @chaselb
Intent # 4
We approved:
Multi-lingual Lesson on Optimism Governance, by Bankless Academy
Reason: Bankless IP will be effective in increasing the Governance Accessibility
Reviewer: @sator
The RetroPGF Podcast
Reason: The blockchain guy youtube channel with 7 k+ followers and quality content will be effective in increasing the governance accessibility. Michael is also an experienced operator in internet native organization.
Reviewer: @sator
Delegate Corner Podcast
Reason: Experience under MetaFactory and especially podcast-related experience at Roll proves a legit track record Sinkas, and we believe they will be able to spread the voices of delegates of OP and enhance the governance accessibility
Reviewer: @sator
REGEN Score - Attestations for the Citizen’s House
Reason: Building out an on-chain reputation metric is aligned with the intent
Reviewer: @sator
Pairwise: Tinder UX For Web 3 Community Signaling
Reason: It will be a great tool for community signaling usage during the retroPGF voting period, and with an experienced team, we believe they will be able to ship it according to the listed milestone.
Reviewer: @sator
DAOStar: Governance standards for the Optimism ecosystem
Reason: [FINAL] DAOstar: Governance standards for the Optimism ecosystem - # 31 by chaselb
Reviewer: @chaselb
OP Governance Analytics Dashboard
Reason: [FINAL] OP Governance Analytics Dashboard - # 19 by chaselb
Reviewer: @chaselb
NumbaNERD Program
Reason: [FINAL] NumbaNERD program - # 10 by chaselb
Reviewer: @chaselb
We did not approve:
Improving Governance Accessibility through Praise and Contribution Based Attestations
Reason: At the time this proposal was already approved and we did not have strong feelings either way, thus we chose to abstain.
Reviewer: @sator
Economic Co-design of Gas Fees for the OP Stack
Reason: Interesting project but we also echo Linda’s point on the huge 125 k $OP ask (even with the 1 -year lock-up). Also we’d like to echo Bobby’s point that “OP Mainnet’s gas fees will not be subject to governance until a proposal type to do so is introduced in a future governance season”, and thus we abstain from this vote.
Reviewer: @sator
Velodrome: Fostering Inclusive Governance through Leading Optimism Builders and Long-term Users
Reason: [FINAL] Velodrome: Fostering Inclusive Governance through Leading Optimism Builders and Long-term Users - # 22 by chaselb
Reviewer: @chaselb
Enable aOP as A Votable Token in Optimism’s Governance
Reason: [FINAL] Enable aOP as A Votable Token in Optimism's Governance - # 22 by chaselb
Reviewer: @chaselb
OPdelegate.com
Reason: [FINAL] OPdelegate.com - # 17 by chaselb
Reviewer: @chaselb
Facilitate and empower community members to actively engage in governance through an educational course
Reason: [FINAL] Facilitate and empower community members to actively engage in governance through an educational course - # 11 by chaselb
Additional context: upon checking in with my co-lead, we both agreed that the course style is insufficient to address the stated problem.
Reviewer: @chaselb
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. We sought to approve proposals that maximized this goal in the best interests of the collective, and we conducted research and sought informed opinions where we didn’t have expertise.
Intent 2 Budget Proposal 2
We voted FOR
Reallocating left over budget from the Mission Proposal Process to an effective and well-run grants program seems like a no brainer. In the future we should try to conduct an analysis on the impact of the grants program on the collective, to better inform decisions like this.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. The grants program is an important avenue for the community to have impact on the Optimism ecosystem, and giving them access to more funds (that were allocated for the community to use anyways) enables the community have more impact on the ecosystem. The only drawback in the context of this mission statement is the potential for the grants council to be a centralizing force asking for more power, however, we believe this is a non-issue as we only are voting to give them leftover funds, and the request for these funds was well argued and justified.
Feel free to contact us with any questions, comments, or concerns about the way we have voted!
Mission Proposals Intent # 1 We approved: Superchain Deepdive Reason: Superchain is on the roadmap…
Mission Proposals Intent # 1 We approved: Superchain Deepdive Reason: Superchain is on the roadmap of Optimism, and there needs to be an initiative be in place for progressive decentralization Reviewer: @Sator TechNERD Program Reason: Technical education inside Optimism are essential Reviewer: @Sator Extend the L 1 Block contract to store historical blockhash data Reason: Access to historical data allows for further decentralization Reviewer: @Sator Spearbit + Immunefi Bug Bounty Program for Large Protocols on Optimism Reason: Security is of paramount importance to the Optimism ecosystem, particularly for large protocols such as Velodrome. Reviewer: @chaselb We did not approve: Fully Decentralized and Independent Oracle and Data Infrastructure Reason: Through consulting with more technical members of our club, we do not believe that this is a practical enough solution considering the request asked for. Reviewer: @sator Future-proofing UI/UX of OP nodes Reason: The timeline for this proposal appeared to be out of scope of the restrictions imposed upon Mission Proposals. Reviewer: @chaselb Intent # 3 We approved: Velodrome: Spread Awareness Through Direct Outreach and Onboarding Reason: Attracting more protocols to the biggest DEX on $OP would definitely bring attention to the OP vision across the DeFi space. Reviewer: @sator BanklessDAO’s Global Campaign to spread the Optimistic vision Reason: BanklessDAO is a cost-effective platform for the intent Reviewer: @sator Create and Maintain the ‘Optimism Vision Reservoir’ Reason: Resource Aggregator on Optimism Vision is an essential for spreading the OP Vision. Reviewer: @sator Optimistic Womxn Shinning in Blockchain Reason: Education + Building in Cohort Style for the LATAM woman community makes sense. Reviewer: @sator Let’s take the Optimistic Vision to LATAM with Espacio Cripto Reason: Education for the LATAM community makes sense. Reviewer: @sator Spread Optimistic values across Latam with Solow Reason: Spreading Optimistic values to diverse communities is important and the ask seems reasonable. Reviewer: @chaselb ‘Thank Optimism - powered by ThriveCoin’ Reason: https://gov.optimism.io/t/final-thank-optimism-powered-by-thrivecoin/ 6104 / 56 Reviewer: @chaselb Web 3 xplorer - A curated web platform to discover useful web 3 apps, resources and tools Reason: https://gov.optimism.io/t/final-web 3 xplorer-a-curated-web-platform-to-discover-useful-web 3 -apps-resources-and-tools/ 6143 / 25 1 Reviewer: @chaselb Rumbo Optimista - Hacia Ethereum Mexico The Event || Optimistic Road in the way to Ethereum México The Event Reason: https://gov.optimism.io/t/final-rumbo-optimista-hacia-ethereum-mexico-the-event-optimistic-road-in-the-way-to-ethereum-mexico-the-event/ 6179 / 22 Reviewer: @chaselb We did not approve: Fueling RetroPGF Growth through Education, Collaboration, and Active Marketing Reason: The initiatives in our opinion were too scattered for the mission proposal format. Reviewer: @sator Develop the most relevant and aligned audiovisual content for the Optimism Collective Reason: [FINAL] Develop the most relevant and aligned audiovisual content for the Optimism Collective - # 25 by chaselb Reviewer: @chaselb Intent # 4 We approved: Multi-lingual Lesson on Optimism Governance, by Bankless Academy Reason: Bankless IP will be effective in increasing the Governance Accessibility Reviewer: @sator The RetroPGF Podcast Reason: The blockchain guy youtube channel with 7 k+ followers and quality content will be effective in increasing the governance accessibility. Michael is also an experienced operator in internet native organization. Reviewer: @sator Delegate Corner Podcast Reason: Experience under MetaFactory and especially podcast-related experience at Roll proves a legit track record Sinkas, and we believe they will be able to spread the voices of delegates of OP and enhance the governance accessibility Reviewer: @sator REGEN Score - Attestations for the Citizen’s House Reason: Building out an on-chain reputation metric is aligned with the intent Reviewer: @sator Pairwise: Tinder UX For Web 3 Community Signaling Reason: It will be a great tool for community signaling usage during the retroPGF voting period, and with an experienced team, we believe they will be able to ship it according to the listed milestone. Reviewer: @sator DAOStar: Governance standards for the Optimism ecosystem Reason: [FINAL] DAOstar: Governance standards for the Optimism ecosystem - # 31 by chaselb Reviewer: @chaselb OP Governance Analytics Dashboard Reason: [FINAL] OP Governance Analytics Dashboard - # 19 by chaselb Reviewer: @chaselb NumbaNERD Program Reason: [FINAL] NumbaNERD program - # 10 by chaselb 1 Reviewer: @chaselb We did not approve: Improving Governance Accessibility through Praise and Contribution Based Attestations Reason: At the time this proposal was already approved and we did not have strong feelings either way, thus we chose to abstain. Reviewer: @sator Economic Co-design of Gas Fees for the OP Stack Reason: Interesting project but we also echo Linda’s point on the huge 125 k $OP ask (even with the 1 -year lock-up). Also we’d like to echo Bobby’s point that “OP Mainnet’s gas fees will not be subject to governance until a proposal type to do so is introduced in a future governance season”, and thus we abstain from this vote. Reviewer: @sator Velodrome: Fostering Inclusive Governance through Leading Optimism Builders and Long-term Users Reason: [FINAL] Velodrome: Fostering Inclusive Governance through Leading Optimism Builders and Long-term Users - # 22 by chaselb Reviewer: @chaselb Enable aOP as A Votable Token in Optimism’s Governance Reason: [FINAL] Enable aOP as A Votable Token in Optimism's Governance - # 22 by chaselb Reviewer: @chaselb OPdelegate.com Reason: [FINAL] OPdelegate.com - # 17 by chaselb 1 Reviewer: @chaselb Facilitate and empower community members to actively engage in governance through an educational course Reason: [FINAL] Facilitate and empower community members to actively engage in governance through an educational course - # 11 by chaselb Additional context: upon checking in with my co-lead, we both agreed that the course style is insufficient to address the stated problem. Reviewer: @chaselb Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” Yes. We sought to approve proposals that maximized this goal in the best interests of the collective, and we conducted research and sought informed opinions where we didn’t have expertise. Intent 2 Budget Proposal 2 We voted FOR Reallocating left over budget from the Mission Proposal Process to an effective and well-run grants program seems like a no brainer. In the future we should try to conduct an analysis on the impact of the grants program on the collective, to better inform decisions like this. Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” Yes. The grants program is an important avenue for the community to have impact on the Optimism ecosystem, and giving them access to more funds (that were allocated for the community to use anyways) enables the community have more impact on the ecosystem. The only drawback in the context of this mission statement is the potential for the grants council to be a centralizing force asking for more power, however, we believe this is a non-issue as we only are voting to give them leftover funds, and the request for these funds was well argued and justified. Feel free to contact us with any questions, comments, or concerns about the way we have voted!
Special Voting Cycle # 16 a
Anticapture Commission
We voted FOR
We believe this is an interesting e…
Special Voting Cycle # 16 a
Anticapture Commission
We voted FOR
We believe this is an interesting experiment in safeguarding the collective. Although the commission seems somewhat counterintuitive (giving the people who already have voting power more voting power?), the people who qualified in practice tend to be very active and aligned members of the collective. Further, the office hours requirements of the commission will require these top delegates to become more transparent and useful to the rest of the collective. This is an experiment and should be treated as such, allowing us to identify what is useful and discard what is not. The biggest worry of this commission is that it is ineffective/wasteful, and yet tries to justify its own existence. We are currently not too worried about this, as none of the members of the commission receive compensation for this extra work.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. Experimentation in community ownership (although admittedly not very inclusive).
Developer Advisory Board Budget and Ratification of Members
We voted FOR (for both)
These developers, simply put, are goated. We would like to see metrics regarding how often they are utilized during their tenure, and perhaps surveys on how useful they are to the community they serve. Compensation is reasonable as long as the board actually serves useful.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. Makes community governance more effective.
Grants Council Operating Budget Proposal
We voted FOR
Dane is the only one who proposed a budget, also, he seems trustworthy as he has been serving in this capacity for a while. His upgrades also appear reasonable and thoroughly justified. In the future there’s should be some dashboard on Optimism Finances for delegates to assess these budgets
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes.
Code of Conduct Council Budget
We voted FOR
The Collective has been asking for a community solution to enforcing code of conduct solutions for a while now, as having to trust the Foundation has proved unsatisfactory (case in point, the Carlos Melgar alleged violation). We believe this is a worthy cause to allocate budget towards.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes.
Security Council: Vote # 1 - Change to Security Model
We voted FOR
Good first step towards placing full trust of the protocol in the Collective’s hands. It’s also a gradual change, since the Foundation still has to approve any upgrades in the 2 / 2 multisig model.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes.
Code of Conduct Violation: Carlos Melgar
We voted AGAINST
Good rationale given in discussion. Essentially, there is not enough info for us as delegates to properly assess the situation. We do not find this a legitimate process through which to suspend someone.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes.
Special Voting Cycle # 16 b
Season 5 : Intents Budget Proposal
We voted FOR
Dane was receptive to feedback, and the budget seems reasonable given Season 4 numbers.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes.
Chain Delegation Program
We voted FOR
We think that OP chains are important stakeholders without much representation currently, and we think this could be a good counter to the OP collective perhaps having an OP Mainnet centric attitude. We worry about OP chains eventually being overrepresented as they start creating revenue, but this is a terminating experiment that could potentially be valuable. We should monitor to determine what type of outcomes are created.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. “Inclusive” of important stakeholders.
Ratification: Law of Chains 1
We voted FOR
This is a needed first step for a shared responsibility and understand of Superchain membership. The one worry is whether or not this “Law” can be enforced properly by the Collective. If not, does it ultimately become meaningless?
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes.
Council Election Info: Season 5
For the following councils, we list the members we approved. In general, we looked for a demonstrated commitment/experience within the optimism collective, and relevant experience within the given council. Relevant experience included: experience building web 3 products, investing in web 3 products, or prior council work.
Growth Experiments:
Michael Vander Meiden
Katie Garcia
MoneyManDoug
GFX
Matt L
Builders:
Jack Anorak
Gonna.eth
Mastermojo
Kaereste
Milestone and Metrics:
Mmurthy
Juanbug_PGov
Raho
Chain_L
v 3 naru_Curia
Code of Conduct:
Juankbell
Teresacd
Oxytocin
Axel_T
Juanbug_PGov
Special Voting Cycle # 16 c
Security Council Vote # 2 : Member Ratification
We voted FOR
We believe this is an important first step of transferring control and power over the protocol from the Foundation to the Optimism Collective. Although we did not elect the security council, they come from reputable backgrounds, and we trust in the Foundation’s initial judgment, with the understanding that after this initial term, the Collective will elect our own Security Council Members. We also hope to see some transparency and measurement into the success of these council members in their role.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. Important first step towards community ownership.
Upgrade # 2 : Canyon Upgrade
We voted FOR
It is a non-breaking upgrade coming from a trusted source (OP Labs), with proper assessment of potential impact and risks. Continuous upgrades to the protocol are important.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. Given the benefits of the upgrade and its low risk, barring this upgrade would be ineffective to the development of the protocol.
Special Voting Cycle # 16 a
Anticapture Commission
We voted FOR
We believe this is an interesting e…
Special Voting Cycle # 16 a
Anticapture Commission
We voted FOR
We believe this is an interesting experiment in safeguarding the collective. Although the commission seems somewhat counterintuitive (giving the people who already have voting power more voting power?), the people who qualified in practice tend to be very active and aligned members of the collective. Further, the office hours requirements of the commission will require these top delegates to become more transparent and useful to the rest of the collective. This is an experiment and should be treated as such, allowing us to identify what is useful and discard what is not. The biggest worry of this commission is that it is ineffective/wasteful, and yet tries to justify its own existence. We are currently not too worried about this, as none of the members of the commission receive compensation for this extra work.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. Experimentation in community ownership (although admittedly not very inclusive).
Developer Advisory Board Budget and Ratification of Members
We voted FOR (for both)
These developers, simply put, are goated. We would like to see metrics regarding how often they are utilized during their tenure, and perhaps surveys on how useful they are to the community they serve. Compensation is reasonable as long as the board actually serves useful.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. Makes community governance more effective.
Grants Council Operating Budget Proposal
We voted FOR
Dane is the only one who proposed a budget, also, he seems trustworthy as he has been serving in this capacity for a while. His upgrades also appear reasonable and thoroughly justified. In the future there’s should be some dashboard on Optimism Finances for delegates to assess these budgets
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes.
Code of Conduct Council Budget
We voted FOR
The Collective has been asking for a community solution to enforcing code of conduct solutions for a while now, as having to trust the Foundation has proved unsatisfactory (case in point, the Carlos Melgar alleged violation). We believe this is a worthy cause to allocate budget towards.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes.
Security Council: Vote # 1 - Change to Security Model
We voted FOR
Good first step towards placing full trust of the protocol in the Collective’s hands. It’s also a gradual change, since the Foundation still has to approve any upgrades in the 2 / 2 multisig model.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes.
Code of Conduct Violation: Carlos Melgar
We voted AGAINST
Good rationale given in discussion. Essentially, there is not enough info for us as delegates to properly assess the situation. We do not find this a legitimate process through which to suspend someone.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes.
Special Voting Cycle # 16 b
Season 5 : Intents Budget Proposal
We voted FOR
Dane was receptive to feedback, and the budget seems reasonable given Season 4 numbers.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes.
Chain Delegation Program
We voted FOR
We think that OP chains are important stakeholders without much representation currently, and we think this could be a good counter to the OP collective perhaps having an OP Mainnet centric attitude. We worry about OP chains eventually being overrepresented as they start creating revenue, but this is a terminating experiment that could potentially be valuable. We should monitor to determine what type of outcomes are created.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. “Inclusive” of important stakeholders.
Ratification: Law of Chains
We voted FOR
This is a needed first step for a shared responsibility and understand of Superchain membership. The one worry is whether or not this “Law” can be enforced properly by the Collective. If not, does it ultimately become meaningless?
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes.
Council Election Info: Season 5
For the following councils, we list the members we approved. In general, we looked for a demonstrated commitment/experience within the optimism collective, and relevant experience within the given council. Relevant experience included: experience building web 3 products, investing in web 3 products, or prior council work.
Growth Experiments:
Michael Vander Meiden
Katie Garcia
MoneyManDoug
GFX
Matt L
Builders:
Jack Anorak
Gonna.eth
Mastermojo
Kaereste
Milestone and Metrics:
Mmurthy
Juanbug_PGov
Raho
Chain_L
v 3 naru_Curia
Code of Conduct:
Juankbell
Teresacd
Oxytocin
Axel_T
Juanbug_PGov
Special Voting Cycle # 16 c
Security Council Vote # 2 : Member Ratification
We voted FOR
We believe this is an important first step of transferring control and power over the protocol from the Foundation to the Optimism Collective. Although we did not elect the security council, they come from reputable backgrounds, and we trust in the Foundation’s initial judgment, with the understanding that after this initial term, the Collective will elect our own Security Council Members. We also hope to see some transparency and measurement into the success of these council members in their role.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. Important first step towards community ownership.
Upgrade # 2 : Canyon Upgrade
We voted FOR
It is a non-breaking upgrade coming from a trusted source (OP Labs), with proper assessment of potential impact and risks. Continuous upgrades to the protocol are important.
Does it fulfill our mission?
“We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.”
Yes. Given the benefits of the upgrade and its low risk, barring this upgrade would be ineffective to the development of the protocol.
Awesome Projects from Club Members. Go check them out!
Incentive Impact Analysis: Yearn ?Monito…
Awesome Projects from Club Members. Go check them out!
Incentive Impact Analysis: Yearn ?Monitoring
Authors: @wyeeeh, @jamieha
Special thanks to support from: Blockchain@USC, @Sator
Program Overview
Protocol: Yearn
Yearn Finance is a DeFi yield aggregation protocol, allowing individuals, DAOs and other protocols to deposit digital assets and receive yield. The core product, yVault, are capital pools that automatically generate yield based on opportunities present in the market, each driven by one or more Strategies.
Governance Fund Season/Cycle: Grant Season 2 , Phase 1 , Cycle 7
Incentive…
Incentive Impact Analysis: Velodrome ?Monitoring
Authors:
@blockchainatusc
@sator
@pancakes_mikey
@ericf
@RSRai
Program Information
Velodrome Finance
Phase 1 , Cycle 8 , Season 2
Date Funded: November 25 , 2023
Wallet Funded: 0 xb 074 ec 6 c 37659525 EEf 2 Fb 44478077901 F 878012
Key Takeaways
Velodrome Finance was mostly successful in accomplishing its set KPIs in the original proposal.
Although several metrics exhibited anomaly spikes and dips, the result of this delegation was a consistent increase in activity across all metrics.
Taking a close…
Special Voting Cycle # 16 a Anticapture Commission We voted FOR We believe this is an interesting e…
Special Voting Cycle # 16 a Anticapture Commission We voted FOR We believe this is an interesting experiment in safeguarding the collective. Although the commission seems somewhat counterintuitive (giving the people who already have voting power more voting power?), the people who qualified in practice tend to be very active and aligned members of the collective. Further, the office hours requirements of the commission will require these top delegates to become more transparent and useful to the rest of the collective. This is an experiment and should be treated as such, allowing us to identify what is useful and discard what is not. The biggest worry of this commission is that it is ineffective/wasteful, and yet tries to justify its own existence. We are currently not too worried about this, as none of the members of the commission receive compensation for this extra work. Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” Yes. Experimentation in community ownership (although admittedly not very inclusive). Developer Advisory Board Budget and Ratification of Members We voted FOR (for both) These developers, simply put, are goated. We would like to see metrics regarding how often they are utilized during their tenure, and perhaps surveys on how useful they are to the community they serve. Compensation is reasonable as long as the board actually serves useful. Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” Yes. Makes community governance more effective. Grants Council Operating Budget Proposal We voted FOR Dane is the only one who proposed a budget, also, he seems trustworthy as he has been serving in this capacity for a while. His upgrades also appear reasonable and thoroughly justified. In the future there’s should be some dashboard on Optimism Finances for delegates to assess these budgets Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” Yes. Code of Conduct Council Budget We voted FOR The Collective has been asking for a community solution to enforcing code of conduct solutions for a while now, as having to trust the Foundation has proved unsatisfactory (case in point, the Carlos Melgar alleged violation). We believe this is a worthy cause to allocate budget towards. Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” Yes. Security Council: Vote # 1 - Change to Security Model We voted FOR Good first step towards placing full trust of the protocol in the Collective’s hands. It’s also a gradual change, since the Foundation still has to approve any upgrades in the 2 / 2 multisig model. Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” Yes. Code of Conduct Violation: Carlos Melgar We voted AGAINST Good rationale given in discussion. Essentially, there is not enough info for us as delegates to properly assess the situation. We do not find this a legitimate process through which to suspend someone. Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” Yes. Special Voting Cycle # 16 b Season 5 : Intents Budget Proposal We voted FOR Dane was receptive to feedback, and the budget seems reasonable given Season 4 numbers. Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” Yes. Chain Delegation Program We voted FOR We think that OP chains are important stakeholders without much representation currently, and we think this could be a good counter to the OP collective perhaps having an OP Mainnet centric attitude. We worry about OP chains eventually being overrepresented as they start creating revenue, but this is a terminating experiment that could potentially be valuable. We should monitor to determine what type of outcomes are created. Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” Yes. “Inclusive” of important stakeholders. Ratification: Law of Chains We voted FOR This is a needed first step for a shared responsibility and understand of Superchain membership. The one worry is whether or not this “Law” can be enforced properly by the Collective. If not, does it ultimately become meaningless? Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” Yes. Council Election Info: Season 5 For the following councils, we list the members we approved. In general, we looked for a demonstrated commitment/experience within the optimism collective, and relevant experience within the given council. Relevant experience included: experience building web 3 products, investing in web 3 products, or prior council work. Growth Experiments: Michael Vander Meiden Katie Garcia MoneyManDoug GFX Matt L Builders: Jack Anorak Gonna.eth Mastermojo Kaereste Milestone and Metrics: Mmurthy Juanbug_PGov Raho Chain_L v 3 naru_Curia Code of Conduct: Juankbell Teresacd Oxytocin Axel_T Juanbug_PGov Special Voting Cycle # 16 c Security Council Vote # 2 : Member Ratification We voted FOR We believe this is an important first step of transferring control and power over the protocol from the Foundation to the Optimism Collective. Although we did not elect the security council, they come from reputable backgrounds, and we trust in the Foundation’s initial judgment, with the understanding that after this initial term, the Collective will elect our own Security Council Members. We also hope to see some transparency and measurement into the success of these council members in their role. Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” Yes. Important first step towards community ownership. Upgrade # 2 : Canyon Upgrade We voted FOR It is a non-breaking upgrade coming from a trusted source (OP Labs), with proper assessment of potential impact and risks. Continuous upgrades to the protocol are important. Does it fulfill our mission? “We strive to promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and effective community ownership and governance of key web 3 infrastructure through thoughtful and researched decision-making and community engagement.” Yes. Given the benefits of the upgrade and its low risk, barring this upgrade would be ineffective to the development of the protocol.
Awesome Projects from Club Members. Go check them out! Incentive Impact Analysis: Yearn ?Monito…
Awesome Projects from Club Members. Go check them out! Incentive Impact Analysis: Yearn ?Monitoring Authors: @wyeeeh, @jamieha Special thanks to support from: Blockchain@USC, @Sator Program Overview Protocol: Yearn Yearn Finance is a DeFi yield aggregation protocol, allowing individuals, DAOs and other protocols to deposit digital assets and receive yield. The core product, yVault, are capital pools that automatically generate yield based on opportunities present in the market, each driven by one or more Strategies. Governance Fund Season/Cycle: Grant Season 2 , Phase 1 , Cycle 7 Incentive… Incentive Impact Analysis: Velodrome ?Monitoring Authors: @blockchainatusc @sator @pancakes_mikey @ericf @RSRai Program Information Velodrome Finance Phase 1 , Cycle 8 , Season 2 Date Funded: November 25 , 2023 Wallet Funded: 0 xb 074 ec 6 c 37659525 EEf 2 Fb 44478077901 F 878012 Key Takeaways Velodrome Finance was mostly successful in accomplishing its set KPIs in the original proposal. Although several metrics exhibited anomaly spikes and dips, the result of this delegation was a consistent increase in activity across all metrics. Taking a close…
