Voting Cycle #2: Roundup

• system - This user is a moderator

  June 23, 2022, 2:35 p.m.
  Magic
  Voting Cycle 2 begins Thursday (June 23 ) at 12 pm PST / 7 pm GMT and runs until Wednesday (July 6 ) at 12 pm PST / 7 pm GMT. Voting will take place in Snapshot. A snapshot of delegate voting weights will be taken at the start of the Voting Cycle. For a detailed breakdown of the governance and voting process, see the Operating Manual. Context Voting Cycle # 2 begins the process of voting for Phase 1 of the Governance Fund. This begins the more open-ended side of the Governance Fund, where allocations are no longer restricted to existing Optimism Projects. A few notes on the process as we enter Phase 1 : Votes will not be batched and each proposal should be individually considered based on its own strengths and weaknesses. As stated in the OPerating Manual, it is the recommendation of the Optimism Foundation that at least one delegate (with > 0 . 0005 % of voting power) signals their belief that the proposal is ready for a vote before passing. The Optimism Foundation has made its best effort to enumerate which proposals have received such supporting signal. The order for this cycle prioritizes those proposals to the start of the list, both in this post and on Snapshot. However, in our spirit of governance minimization, all proposals marked READY by authors are up for consideration and votable. As such, the recommendation of the OPerating Manual can be overridden if delegates so choose. As a reminder, the purpose of the Governance Fund is meant to spur sustainable growth and activity on the Optimism network. More information can be found in the Governance Fund Phase 1 template. The Optimism Foundation notes that there is a significant allocation OP tokens for Retroactive Public Goods Funding (RPGF), as detailed in the Allocations Documentation 29 , which is distinct from Phase 1 . As above, in the spirit of governance minimization, the Optimism Foundation has not performed any filtering based on whether or not a proposal accomplishes this goal. The Token House could override the above intention and pass any of the votable proposals. As a reminder, this would not be decremented from the RPGF allocation, and instead be removed from the ~ 230 M OP Governance Fund. Proposals Aside from the approval/non-approval delineation, proposals are listed in order of first appearance on this forum. Proposals with Explicit Delegate Approval Proposal O: ParaSwap Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/live-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-paraswap/ 2228 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/live-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-paraswap/ 2228 / 24 ?u=ben-chain Note: This approval was marked LIVE instead of READY and therefore overlooked in the initial generation of this list. It appears first here in order of appearance but has been given the letter “O.” Proposal A: Optimistic Railway Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-optimistic-railway/ 2309 96 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-optimistic-railway/ 2309 / 23 48 Proposal B: dForce Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-dforce/ 2420 47 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-dforce/ 2420 / 17 34 Proposal C: GYSR Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-gysr/ 2463 50 Approval: [Marked as ready by author, who is also a delegate] Proposal D: Mean Finance Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-mean-finance/ 2537 57 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-mean-finance/ 2537 / 25 22 Proposal E: Raptor Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-raptor/ 2547 36 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-raptor/ 2547 / 22 16 Proposal Q: Candide Wallet Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-candide-wallet/ 2656 / Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-candide-wallet/ 2656 / 13 7 Note: This submission was missed in the initial creation of this list. It has been given the letter “Q” but appears here in the order of appearance. Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-balancer-beethovenx/ 2658 59 Approval: [Marked as ready by author, who is also a delegate] Proposal G: Summa Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-summa/ 2678 31 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-summa/ 2678 / 18 10 Proposal H: WardenSwap Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-wardenswap/ 2712 54 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-wardenswap/ 2712 / 29 35 Proposal K: Infinity Wallet Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-infinity-wallet/ 2713 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/voting-cycle- 2 -roundup/ 2754 / 17 Note: This proposal’s delegate approval was miscommunicated in the initial generation of this list, and it was initially placed in the non-approved category. It appears here now in order of appearance (and in the correct category) but has been given the letter “K.” The proposal has been re-submitted to snapshot with updated text to reflect that it was indeed approved by a delegate. Proposal I: Pickle Finance Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-pickle-finance/ 2723 43 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-pickle-finance/ 2723 / 7 23 Proposal P: Rotki Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -rotki/ 2732 / Approval: [Marked as ready by author, who is also a delegate] Note: This submission was missed in the initial creation of this list. It has been given the letter “P” but appears here in the order of appearance Proposals without Explicit Delegate Approval Proposal J: Ooki Protocol https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-ooki-protocol/ 1025 56 Proposal L: Beefy https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-beefy/ 2719 Proposal M: 0 xHabitat https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal- 0 xhabitat/ 2730 15 Proposal N: Thales https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -thales/ 2743 56

  Voting Cycle 2 commences on June 23 at 12 pm PST / 7 pm GMT until July 6 at 12 pm PST / 7 pm GMT on Snapshot for Phase 1 of the Governance Fund. The process includes individual consideration of proposals, with the recommendation for delegate signaling before voting. Proposals are listed in Snapshot based on readiness signals. The purpose of the Governance Fund is to foster sustainable growth on the Optimism network. A notable allocation is for Retroactive Public Goods Funding. Proposals include ParaSwap, Optimistic Railway, dForce, GYSR, Mean Finance, Raptor, Candide Wallet, Balancer & BeethovenX, Summa, WardenSwap, Infinity Wallet, Pickle Finance, Rotki, Ooki Protocol, Beefy, 0xHabitat, and Thales.
  Likes: 39 Replies: 3
  Likers: Naserya, sezar, Mehdia, NicoProducto, Prometheus, AxlVaz, darkman, wubai0900, pratoinvest, eamashhadi, kalamia, WrTZ, LeoRedKD, devranjan, MAMI, tomoonae, konkinbiw, polynya, Vad, dayli, chicco, wie, mason, TVop81, leivey, adaykak, bahmanwi, ManbuYun, Ruby, 0xWeston, rhic, dfmi2022, yyw, hoo, ayennn, CRIPTOESP, KnightWhiteH, blackboy665, Yaccine
  Replies:

  • Cryptoz: You are missing ParaSwap I believe [LIVE] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] ParaSwap, they set LIVE as I think @OPUser said LIVE when he meant READY ([LIVE] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] ParaSwap - #24 by OPUser)
  • nogahev839: system: Proposal K: Infinity Wallet Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase-1-proposal-infinity-wallet/2713 Approval: Voting Cycle #2: Roundup - #17 by OPUser Note: This proposal’s delegate approval was miscommunicated in the initial generation of this list, and it was initially placed in the non-approved category. It appears here now in order of appearance (and in the correct category) but has been given the letter “K.” The proposal has been re-submitted to snapshot with updated text to reflect that it was indeed approved by a delegate. Il be voting for Infinity Wallet. Its the best wallet in the space by a far and will play a large role in mainstream crypto and defi adoption.
  • yyw: cool，Mean Finance, good choice.
• system - This user is a moderator

  June 23, 2022, 2:35 p.m.
  Voting Cycle 2 begins Thursday (June 23 ) at 12 pm PST / 7 pm GMT and runs until Wednesday (Ju… Voting Cycle 2 begins Thursday (June 23 ) at 12 pm PST / 7 pm GMT and runs until Wednesday (July 6 ) at 12 pm PST / 7 pm GMT. Voting will take place in Snapshot. A snapshot of delegate voting weights will be taken at the start of the Voting Cycle. For a detailed breakdown of the governance and voting process, see the Operating Manual. Context Voting Cycle # 2 begins the process of voting for Phase 1 of the Governance Fund. This begins the more open-ended side of the Governance Fund, where allocations are no longer restricted to existing Optimism Projects. A few notes on the process as we enter Phase 1 : Votes will not be batched and each proposal should be individually considered based on its own strengths and weaknesses. As stated in the OPerating Manual, it is the recommendation of the Optimism Foundation that at least one delegate (with > 0 . 0005 % of voting power) signals their belief that the proposal is ready for a vote before passing. The Optimism Foundation has made its best effort to enumerate which proposals have received such supporting signal. The order for this cycle prioritizes those proposals to the start of the list, both in this post and on Snapshot. However, in our spirit of governance minimization, all proposals marked READY by authors are up for consideration and votable. As such, the recommendation of the OPerating Manual can be overridden if delegates so choose. As a reminder, the purpose of the Governance Fund is meant to spur sustainable growth and activity on the Optimism network. More information can be found in the Governance Fund Phase 1 template. The Optimism Foundation notes that there is a significant allocation OP tokens for Retroactive Public Goods Funding (RPGF), as detailed in the Allocations Documentation, which is distinct from Phase 1 . As above, in the spirit of governance minimization, the Optimism Foundation has not performed any filtering based on whether or not a proposal accomplishes this goal. The Token House could override the above intention and pass any of the votable proposals. As a reminder, this would not be decremented from the RPGF allocation, and instead be removed from the ~ 230 M OP Governance Fund. Proposals Aside from the approval/non-approval delineation, proposals are listed in order of first appearance on this forum. Proposals with Explicit Delegate Approval Proposal O: ParaSwap Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/live-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-paraswap/ 2228 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/live-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-paraswap/ 2228 / 24 ?u=ben-chain Note: This approval was marked LIVE instead of READY and therefore overlooked in the initial generation of this list. It appears first here in order of appearance but has been given the letter “O.” Proposal A: Optimistic Railway Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-optimistic-railway/ 2309 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-optimistic-railway/ 2309 / 23 Proposal B: dForce Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-dforce/ 2420 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-dforce/ 2420 / 17 Proposal C: GYSR Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-gysr/ 2463 Approval: [Marked as ready by author, who is also a delegate] Proposal D: Mean Finance Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-mean-finance/ 2537 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-mean-finance/ 2537 / 25 Proposal E: Raptor Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-raptor/ 2547 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-raptor/ 2547 / 22 Proposal Q: Candide Wallet Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-candide-wallet/ 2656 / Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-candide-wallet/ 2656 / 13 Note: This submission was missed in the initial creation of this list. It has been given the letter “Q” but appears here in the order of appearance. Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-balancer-beethovenx/ 2658 Approval: [Marked as ready by author, who is also a delegate] Proposal G: Summa Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-summa/ 2678 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-summa/ 2678 / 18 Proposal H: WardenSwap Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-wardenswap/ 2712 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-wardenswap/ 2712 / 29 Proposal K: Infinity Wallet Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-infinity-wallet/ 2713 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/voting-cycle- 2 -roundup/ 2754 / 17 Note: This proposal’s delegate approval was miscommunicated in the initial generation of this list, and it was initially placed in the non-approved category. It appears here now in order of appearance (and in the correct category) but has been given the letter “K.” The proposal has been re-submitted to snapshot with updated text to reflect that it was indeed approved by a delegate. Proposal I: Pickle Finance Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-pickle-finance/ 2723 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-pickle-finance/ 2723 / 7 Proposal P: Rotki Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -rotki/ 2732 / Approval: [Marked as ready by author, who is also a delegate] Note: This submission was missed in the initial creation of this list. It has been given the letter “P” but appears here in the order of appearance Proposals without Explicit Delegate Approval Proposal J: Ooki Protocol https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-ooki-protocol/ 1025 Proposal L: Beefy https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-beefy/ 2719 Proposal M: 0 xHabitat https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal- 0 xhabitat/ 2730 Proposal N: Thales https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -thales/ 2743
  Likes: 39 Replies: 3

  View More
  Likers: Naserya, sezar, Mehdia, NicoProducto, Prometheus, AxlVaz, darkman, wubai0900, pratoinvest, eamashhadi, kalamia, WrTZ, LeoRedKD, devranjan, MAMI, tomoonae, konkinbiw, polynya, Vad, dayli, chicco, wie, mason, TVop81, leivey, adaykak, bahmanwi, ManbuYun, Ruby, 0xWeston, rhic, dfmi2022, yyw, hoo, ayennn, CRIPTOESP, KnightWhiteH, blackboy665, Yaccine
  Replies:

  • Cryptoz: You are missing ParaSwap I believe [LIVE] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] ParaSwap, they set LIVE as I think @OPUser said LIVE when he meant READY ([LIVE] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] ParaSwap - #24 by OPUser)
  • nogahev839: system: Proposal K: Infinity Wallet Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase-1-proposal-infinity-wallet/2713 Approval: Voting Cycle #2: Roundup - #17 by OPUser Note: This proposal’s delegate approval was miscommunicated in the initial generation of this list, and it was initially placed in the non-approved category. It appears here now in order of appearance (and in the correct category) but has been given the letter “K.” The proposal has been re-submitted to snapshot with updated text to reflect that it was indeed approved by a delegate. Il be voting for Infinity Wallet. Its the best wallet in the space by a far and will play a large role in mainstream crypto and defi adoption.
  • yyw: cool，Mean Finance, good choice.
• Cryptoz - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 3:16 p.m.
  You are missing ParaSwap I believe [LIVE] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] ParaSwap 9 , they set LIVE as I… You are missing ParaSwap I believe [LIVE] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] ParaSwap 9 , they set LIVE as I think @OPUser said LIVE when he meant READY ([LIVE] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] ParaSwap - # 24 by OPUser 6 )
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: 0xyzJP
  No replies yet.
• Cryptoz - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 3:16 p.m.
  You are missing ParaSwap I believe [LIVE] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] ParaSwap, they set LIVE as I thi… You are missing ParaSwap I believe [LIVE] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] ParaSwap, they set LIVE as I think @OPUser said LIVE when he meant READY ([LIVE] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] ParaSwap - # 24 by OPUser)
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: 0xyzJP
  No replies yet.
• OPUser - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 3:19 p.m.
  You are right, just saw that too. It was a mistake on my behalf, I indeed meant Ready. Apologies. You are right, just saw that too. It was a mistake on my behalf, I indeed meant Ready. Apologies.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: Cryptoz
  No replies yet.
• RubensHer - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 3:24 p.m.
  Looks OK. Mean Finance, good choice. Looks OK. Mean Finance, good choice.
  Likes: 4 Replies: 1

  View More
  Likers: 0xzenodotus, sam, Thong, blackboy665
  Replies:

  • Hamidtaji: where is it? how vote ir?
• 0xzenodotus - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 3:27 p.m.
  dang, I didn’t make a proposal fast enough </ 3 dang, I didn’t make a proposal fast enough
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• Cryptoz - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 3:28 p.m.
  There are a few things I think that were missed here: Mean Finance - The approval link quoted is th… There are a few things I think that were missed here: Mean Finance - The approval link quoted is that of the proposer and not of a delegator ([READY][GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Mean Finance - # 25 by 0 xged 7 ) Raptor - I am unsure but I believe some people took back their support for Raptor after further discussion ([READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Raptor - # 49 by OPUser 3 ) Infinity Wallet - I believe it had support from @OPUser [READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Infinity Wallet - # 14 by OPUser 2 Don’t think I missed anyone else! Edit: There was also possibly [READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Beefy - # 14 by MoneyManDoug 2 as Beefy did reduce, but not sure!
  Likes: 5 Replies: 3

  View More
  Likers: OPUser, 0xged, 0xyzJP, CRIPTOESP, Lito_tm
  Replies:

  • vonnie610: Mean Finance (proposal D), Raptor (proposal E), Infinity Wallet (proposal K) are all here. Thanks for checking though!
  • ben-chain: I will defer to @OPUser on the other two approval cases and can edit the post based on their reply.
  • OPUser: Thank you for checking the approvals, appreciated.
• Cryptoz - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 3:28 p.m.
  There are a few things I think that were missed here: Mean Finance - The approval link quoted is th… There are a few things I think that were missed here: Mean Finance - The approval link quoted is that of the proposer and not of a delegator ([READY][GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Mean Finance - # 25 by 0 xged) Raptor - I am unsure but I believe some people took back their support for Raptor after further discussion ([READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Raptor - # 49 by OPUser) Infinity Wallet - I believe it had support from @OPUser [READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Infinity Wallet - # 14 by OPUser Don’t think I missed anyone else! Edit: There was also possibly [READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Beefy - # 14 by MoneyManDoug as Beefy did reduce, but not sure!
  Likes: 5 Replies: 3

  View More
  Likers: OPUser, 0xged, 0xyzJP, CRIPTOESP, Lito_tm
  Replies:

  • vonnie610: Mean Finance (proposal D), Raptor (proposal E), Infinity Wallet (proposal K) are all here. Thanks for checking though!
  • ben-chain: I will defer to @OPUser on the other two approval cases and can edit the post based on their reply.
  • OPUser: Thank you for checking the approvals, appreciated.
• vonnie610 - Leader, This user is a moderator

  June 23, 2022, 3:31 p.m.
  Mean Finance (proposal D), Raptor (proposal E), Infinity Wallet (proposal K) are all here. Thanks f… Mean Finance (proposal D), Raptor (proposal E), Infinity Wallet (proposal K) are all here. Thanks for checking though!
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: 0xged
  No replies yet.
• Cryptoz - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 3:32 p.m.
  I mean missed in terms of supported by a delegator or not :laughing: I mean missed in terms of supported by a delegator or not :laughing:
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• 0xzenodotus - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 3:34 p.m.
  Hmm…wait, as I read further, am I able to create and submit a proposal still? Hmm…wait, as I read further, am I able to create and submit a proposal still?
  Likes: 0 Replies: 1

  View More
  No likes yet.
  Replies:

  • ben-chain: You can make a proposal for consideration in Cycle #3!
• ben-chain - This user is a moderator

  June 23, 2022, 3:35 p.m.
  Thanks for the feedback! WRT Mean Finance, just to share the logic–@OPUser 's react to the linked c… Thanks for the feedback! WRT Mean Finance, just to share the logic–@OPUser 's react to the linked comment was considered an approval for this purpose. Something we should probably make more explicit going forward.
  Likes: 2 Replies: 1

  View More
  Likers: Cryptoz, OPUser
  Replies:

  • OPUser: Thank you for the feedback, @ben-chain . Going forward will be more precise. For other two, its not too late, please exclude Raptor from the list, Infinity Wallet will remain as I support their proposal.
• ben-chain - This user is a moderator

  June 23, 2022, 3:36 p.m.
  I will defer to @OPUser on the other two approval cases and can edit the post based on their reply. I will defer to @OPUser on the other two approval cases and can edit the post based on their reply.
  Likes: 2 Replies: 1

  View More
  Likers: Cryptoz, OPUser
  Replies:

  • Cryptoz: I think it would be a good idea to have a thread or a channel on discord where delegators can post what projects they support and edit their support for a project up until the voting begins. This way it wont cause the current issue seen in this vote were projects supported by delegators show as not supported and projects not supported by delegators shows as supported. It makes a big difference when people are voting for proposals as these mistakes could make or break a proposal.
• ben-chain - This user is a moderator

  June 23, 2022, 3:37 p.m.
  You can make a proposal for consideration in Cycle # 3 ! You can make a proposal for consideration in Cycle # 3 !
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: 0xzenodotus
  No replies yet.
• Hamidtaji - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 3:37 p.m.
  where is it? how vote ir? where is it? how vote ir?
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• 0xzenodotus - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 3:48 p.m.
  Cheers! Do you happen to have a link for me to read up on Cycle # 3 ? Some personal stuff came up a… Cheers! Do you happen to have a link for me to read up on Cycle # 3 ? Some personal stuff came up and I didn’t get a proposal together in enough time. :pray:
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• OPUser - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 4:14 p.m.
  Thank you for the feedback, @ben-chain . Going forward will be more precise. For other two, its not… Thank you for the feedback, @ben-chain . Going forward will be more precise. For other two, its not too late, please exclude Raptor from the list, Infinity Wallet will remain as I support their proposal.
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• OPUser - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 4:15 p.m.
  Thank you for checking the approvals, appreciated. Thank you for checking the approvals, appreciated.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: Cryptoz
  No replies yet.
• Cryptoz - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 4:19 p.m.
  @OPUser No problem, training to become a delegator one day :wink: @OPUser No problem, training to become a delegator one day :wink:
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: OPUser
  No replies yet.
• kryos.eth - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 4:48 p.m.
  Some really good proposals, and some really bad ones too. Read each token distribution carefully. Some really good proposals, and some really bad ones too. Read each token distribution carefully.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: MinimalGravitas
  No replies yet.
• lefterisjp - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 5:48 p.m.
  What is the reason for not including the rotki proposal in this voting round? I believe it meets al… What is the reason for not including the rotki proposal in this voting round? I believe it meets all of the criteria specified here as I specifically tried to time them so: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -rotki/ ? The change from DRAFT to READY happened here: [READY] [GF: Phase 1 ] rotki - # 14 by lefterisjp to meet the deadline. Reading the linked guide on proposals I understood I should have done it myself. If someone else should have done it then no worries, I must have misunderstood.
  Likes: 3 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: Axel_T, OPUser, Izzy
  No replies yet.
• Axel_T - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 6:01 p.m.
  Hi @lefterisjp I noticed your issue too. For some reason you were the only [READY] Proposal that di… Hi @lefterisjp I noticed your issue too. For some reason you were the only [READY] Proposal that didn’t make it into the voting round? And yes, from my own tracking, it was set as READY around 24 hours ago (and before other Proposals who did end up making it into the vote). Finally, FYI: For my Proposal, I personally changed it from DRAFT to READY, so that shouldn’t be the issue with yours either. Hope you get the explanation you seek. Kind regards, Axel
  Likes: 0 Replies: 1

  View More
  No likes yet.
  Replies:

  • lefterisjp: I mean it’s kind of fine, if it gets pushed to the next round (so long as there is OP left ). Would just like to know what I did wrong and which rule I broke since I spent quite some time to make sure all rules were followed. It’s already a lot of proposals for delegates to think on! I am also a delegate and I have not even read half of the proposals yet. Pushing our proposal further does make a big difference to us as it means we will have to switch our planning and have a potentially big project on a “maybe” basis for whenever next round ends. As an opensource project whose main source of income is grants having a clear answer (yes or no) for funding a potential big project is crucial.
• lefterisjp - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 6:17 p.m.
  I mean it’s kind of fine, if it gets pushed to the next round (so long as there is OP left :joy:). … I mean it’s kind of fine, if it gets pushed to the next round (so long as there is OP left :joy:). Would just like to know what I did wrong and which rule I broke since I spent quite some time to make sure all rules were followed. It’s already a lot of proposals for delegates to think on! I am also a delegate and I have not even read half of the proposals yet. Pushing our proposal further does make a big difference to us as it means we will have to switch our planning and have a potentially big project on a “maybe” basis for whenever next round ends. As an opensource project whose main source of income is grants having a clear answer (yes or no) for funding a potential big project is crucial.
  Likes: 2 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: Axel_T, maintainer.eth
  No replies yet.
• Cryptoz - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 6:29 p.m.
  They made a couple of mistakes like putting a project as delegator approved when it wasn’t and anot… They made a couple of mistakes like putting a project as delegator approved when it wasn’t and another project as not delegator approved when it was. It does though seem a bit more severe missing an entire proposal! They still need to fix the other mistakes so maybe there is time to add you :crossed_fingers: Edit: I have just noticed they are going to also need to update the snapshot vote for the projects mentioned further up in this discussion since its wrong there also. It looks like having delegator approved makes a difference for general voters when selecting to support a proposal or not.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: lefterisjp
  No replies yet.
• system - This user is a moderator

  June 23, 2022, 6:35 p.m.
  Voting Cycle 2 begins Thursday (June 23 ) at 12 pm PST / 7 pm GMT and runs until Wednesday (Ju… Voting Cycle 2 begins Thursday (June 23 ) at 12 pm PST / 7 pm GMT and runs until Wednesday (July 6 ) at 12 pm PST / 7 pm GMT. Voting will take place in Snapshot. A snapshot of delegate voting weights will be taken at the start of the Voting Cycle. For a detailed breakdown of the governance and voting process, see the Operating Manual. Context Voting Cycle # 2 begins the process of voting for Phase 1 of the Governance Fund. This begins the more open-ended side of the Governance Fund, where allocations are no longer restricted to existing Optimism Projects. A few notes on the process as we enter Phase 1 : Votes will not be batched and each proposal should be individually considered based on its own strengths and weaknesses. As stated in the OPerating Manual, it is the recommendation of the Optimism Foundation that at least one delegate (with > 0 . 0005 % of voting power) signals their belief that the proposal is ready for a vote before passing. The Optimism Foundation has made its best effort to enumerate which proposals have received such supporting signal. The order for this cycle prioritizes those proposals to the start of the list, both in this post and on Snapshot. However, in our spirit of governance minimization, all proposals marked READY by authors are up for consideration and votable. As such, the recommendation of the OPerating Manual can be overridden if delegates so choose. As a reminder, the purpose of the Governance Fund is meant to spur sustainable growth and activity on the Optimism network. More information can be found in the Governance Fund Phase 1 template. The Optimism Foundation notes that there is a significant allocation OP tokens for Retroactive Public Goods Funding (RPGF), as detailed in the Allocations Documentation 29 , which is distinct from Phase 1 . As above, in the spirit of governance minimization, the Optimism Foundation has not performed any filtering based on whether or not a proposal accomplishes this goal. The Token House could override the above intention and pass any of the votable proposals. As a reminder, this would not be decremented from the RPGF allocation, and instead be removed from the ~ 230 M OP Governance Fund. Proposals Aside from the approval/non-approval delineation, proposals are listed in order of first appearance on this forum. Proposals with Explicit Delegate Approval Proposal O: ParaSwap Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/live-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-paraswap/ 2228 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/live-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-paraswap/ 2228 / 24 ?u=ben-chain Note: This approval was marked LIVE instead of READY and therefore overlooked in the initial generation of this list. It appears first here in order of appearance but has been given the letter “O.” Proposal A: Optimistic Railway Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-optimistic-railway/ 2309 95 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-optimistic-railway/ 2309 / 23 47 Proposal B: dForce Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-dforce/ 2420 47 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-dforce/ 2420 / 17 33 Proposal C: GYSR Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-gysr/ 2463 49 Approval: [Marked as ready by author, who is also a delegate] Proposal D: Mean Finance Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-mean-finance/ 2537 56 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-mean-finance/ 2537 / 25 22 Proposal E: Raptor Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-raptor/ 2547 36 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-raptor/ 2547 / 22 16 Proposal Q: Candide Wallet Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-candide-wallet/ 2656 / Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-candide-wallet/ 2656 / 13 7 Note: This submission was missed in the initial creation of this list. It has been given the letter “Q” but appears here in the order of appearance. Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-balancer-beethovenx/ 2658 58 Approval: [Marked as ready by author, who is also a delegate] Proposal G: Summa Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-summa/ 2678 31 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-summa/ 2678 / 18 10 Proposal H: WardenSwap Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-wardenswap/ 2712 52 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-wardenswap/ 2712 / 29 35 Proposal K: Infinity Wallet Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-infinity-wallet/ 2713 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/voting-cycle- 2 -roundup/ 2754 / 17 Note: This proposal’s delegate approval was miscommunicated in the initial generation of this list, and it was initially placed in the non-approved category. It appears here now in order of appearance (and in the correct category) but has been given the letter “K.” The proposal has been re-submitted to snapshot with updated text to reflect that it was indeed approved by a delegate. Proposal I: Pickle Finance Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-pickle-finance/ 2723 42 Approval: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-pickle-finance/ 2723 / 7 23 Proposal P: Rotki Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -rotki/ 2732 / Approval: [Marked as ready by author, who is also a delegate] Note: This submission was missed in the initial creation of this list. It has been given the letter “P” but appears here in the order of appearance Proposals without Explicit Delegate Approval Proposal J: Ooki Protocol https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-ooki-protocol/ 1025 56 Proposal L: Beefy https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-beefy/ 2719 Proposal M: 0 xHabitat https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal- 0 xhabitat/ 2730 15 Proposal N: Thales https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -thales/ 2743 56
  Likes: 43 Replies: 3

  View More
  Likers: naserya, sezar, mehdia, nicoproducto, prometheus, axlvaz, darkman, wubai0900, pratoinvest, eamashhadi, kalamia, wrtz, leoredkd, devranjan, mami, artistotle, tomoonae, konkinbiw, polynya, vad, dayli, chicco, papa, wie, mason, tvop81, leivey, adaykak, bahmanwi, manbuyun, ruby, matthew, 0xweston, rhic, dfmi2022, yyw, hoo, wen, ayennn, criptoesp, knightwhiteh, blackboy665, yaccine
  Replies:

  • Cryptoz: You are missing ParaSwap I believe [LIVE] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] ParaSwap, they set LIVE as I think @OPUser said LIVE when he meant READY ([LIVE] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] ParaSwap - #24 by OPUser)
  • nogahev839: system: Proposal K: Infinity Wallet Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase-1-proposal-infinity-wallet/2713 Approval: Voting Cycle #2: Roundup - #17 by OPUser Note: This proposal’s delegate approval was miscommunicated in the initial generation of this list, and it was initially placed in the non-approved category. It appears here now in order of appearance (and in the correct category) but has been given the letter “K.” The proposal has been re-submitted to snapshot with updated text to reflect that it was indeed approved by a delegate. Il be voting for Infinity Wallet. Its the best wallet in the space by a far and will play a large role in mainstream crypto and defi adoption.
  • yyw: cool，Mean Finance, good choice.
• Cryptoz - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 7:16 p.m.
  You are missing ParaSwap I believe [LIVE] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] ParaSwap 9 , they set LIVE as I… You are missing ParaSwap I believe [LIVE] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] ParaSwap 9 , they set LIVE as I think @OPUser said LIVE when he meant READY ([LIVE] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] ParaSwap - # 24 by OPUser 6 )
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: 0xyzjp
  No replies yet.
• OPUser - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 7:17 p.m.
  As we are closing Phase 0 and starting the vote on Phase 1 , I have shared some thoughts on “Acco… As we are closing Phase 0 and starting the vote on Phase 1 , I have shared some thoughts on “Accountability” of token being distributed to the project(s), would love to hear your opinion and feedback. Accountability of Phase 0 / 1 Funds given to projects Grants Phase 0 has officially ended and soon team will unlock 36 M OP token and distribute it to the Phase 0 projects. Same steps will happen for Phase 1 projects when voting will end for Phase 1 . Similar to Phase 0 proposals, I have gone through all the Phase 1 Proposals, I have followed them, suggested them something and learned something from them. Now, I will cast my vote and would like to know how the project(s) are spending those token given to them. Some are saying I can follow the token recip… Admin, please delete this comment if this thread is not the right place to share this.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: AxlVaz
  No replies yet.
• OPUser - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 7:19 p.m.
  You are right, just saw that too. It was a mistake on my behalf, I indeed meant Ready. Apologies. You are right, just saw that too. It was a mistake on my behalf, I indeed meant Ready. Apologies.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: cryptoz
  No replies yet.
• AxlVaz - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 7:22 p.m.
  Check this document where you can see the proposals to vote, it will be updated? I have seen that s… Check this document where you can see the proposals to vote, it will be updated? I have seen that some last minute proposals have been submitted such as MakerDAO and LIDO. We should be clearer with the steps or there should be a pre-selection before dumping the proposals to snapshot.
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• RubensHer - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 7:24 p.m.
  Looks OK. Mean Finance, good choice. Looks OK. Mean Finance, good choice.
  Likes: 4 Replies: 1

  View More
  Likers: 0xzenodotus, sam, thong, blackboy665
  Replies:

  • Hamidtaji: where is it? how vote ir?
• 0xzenodotus - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 7:27 p.m.
  dang, I didn’t make a proposal fast enough </ 3 dang, I didn’t make a proposal fast enough
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• Cryptoz - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 7:28 p.m.
  There are a few things I think that were missed here: Mean Finance - The approval link quoted is th… There are a few things I think that were missed here: Mean Finance - The approval link quoted is that of the proposer and not of a delegator ([READY][GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Mean Finance - # 25 by 0 xged 7 ) Raptor - I am unsure but I believe some people took back their support for Raptor after further discussion ([READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Raptor - # 49 by OPUser 3 ) Infinity Wallet - I believe it had support from @OPUser [READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Infinity Wallet - # 14 by OPUser 2 Don’t think I missed anyone else! Edit: There was also possibly [READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Beefy - # 14 by MoneyManDoug 2 as Beefy did reduce, but not sure!
  Likes: 5 Replies: 3

  View More
  Likers: opuser, 0xged, 0xyzjp, criptoesp, lito_tm
  Replies:

  • vonnie610: Mean Finance (proposal D), Raptor (proposal E), Infinity Wallet (proposal K) are all here. Thanks for checking though!
  • ben-chain: I will defer to @OPUser on the other two approval cases and can edit the post based on their reply.
  • OPUser: Thank you for checking the approvals, appreciated.
• vonnie610 - This user is a moderator

  June 23, 2022, 7:31 p.m.
  Mean Finance (proposal D), Raptor (proposal E), Infinity Wallet (proposal K) are all here. Thanks f… Mean Finance (proposal D), Raptor (proposal E), Infinity Wallet (proposal K) are all here. Thanks for checking though!
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: 0xged
  No replies yet.
• Cryptoz - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 7:32 p.m.
  I mean missed in terms of supported by a delegator or not :laughing: I mean missed in terms of supported by a delegator or not :laughing:
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• 0xzenodotus - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 7:34 p.m.
  Hmm…wait, as I read further, am I able to create and submit a proposal still? Hmm…wait, as I read further, am I able to create and submit a proposal still?
  Likes: 0 Replies: 1

  View More
  No likes yet.
  Replies:

  • ben-chain: You can make a proposal for consideration in Cycle #3!
• ben-chain - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 7:35 p.m.
  Thanks for the feedback! WRT Mean Finance, just to share the logic–@OPUser 's react to the linked c… Thanks for the feedback! WRT Mean Finance, just to share the logic–@OPUser 's react to the linked comment was considered an approval for this purpose. Something we should probably make more explicit going forward.
  Likes: 2 Replies: 1

  View More
  Likers: cryptoz, opuser
  Replies:

  • OPUser: Thank you for the feedback, @ben-chain . Going forward will be more precise. For other two, its not too late, please exclude Raptor from the list, Infinity Wallet will remain as I support their proposal.
• ben-chain - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 7:36 p.m.
  I will defer to @OPUser on the other two approval cases and can edit the post based on their reply. I will defer to @OPUser on the other two approval cases and can edit the post based on their reply.
  Likes: 2 Replies: 1

  View More
  Likers: cryptoz, opuser
  Replies:

  • Cryptoz: I think it would be a good idea to have a thread or a channel on discord where delegators can post what projects they support and edit their support for a project up until the voting begins. This way it wont cause the current issue seen in this vote were projects supported by delegators show as not supported and projects not supported by delegators shows as supported. It makes a big difference when people are voting for proposals as these mistakes could make or break a proposal.
• ben-chain - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 7:37 p.m.
  You can make a proposal for consideration in Cycle # 3 ! You can make a proposal for consideration in Cycle # 3 !
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: 0xzenodotus
  No replies yet.
• Hamidtaji - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 7:37 p.m.
  where is it? how vote ir? where is it? how vote ir?
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• 0xzenodotus - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 7:48 p.m.
  Cheers! Do you happen to have a link for me to read up on Cycle # 3 ? Some personal stuff came up a… Cheers! Do you happen to have a link for me to read up on Cycle # 3 ? Some personal stuff came up and I didn’t get a proposal together in enough time. :pray:
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• OPUser - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 8:14 p.m.
  Thank you for the feedback, @ben-chain . Going forward will be more precise. For other two, its not… Thank you for the feedback, @ben-chain . Going forward will be more precise. For other two, its not too late, please exclude Raptor from the list, Infinity Wallet will remain as I support their proposal.
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• OPUser - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 8:15 p.m.
  Thank you for checking the approvals, appreciated. Thank you for checking the approvals, appreciated.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: cryptoz
  No replies yet.
• Cryptoz - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 8:19 p.m.
  @OPUser No problem, training to become a delegator one day :wink: @OPUser No problem, training to become a delegator one day :wink:
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: opuser
  No replies yet.
• kryos.eth - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 8:48 p.m.
  Some really good proposals, and some really bad ones too. Read each token distribution carefully. Some really good proposals, and some really bad ones too. Read each token distribution carefully.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: minimalgravitas
  No replies yet.
• lefterisjp - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 9:48 p.m.
  What is the reason for not including the rotki proposal in this voting round? I believe it meets al… What is the reason for not including the rotki proposal in this voting round? I believe it meets all of the criteria specified here 1 as I specifically tried to time them so: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -rotki/ ? The change from DRAFT to READY happened here: [READY] [GF: Phase 1 ] rotki - # 14 by lefterisjp 5 to meet the deadline. Reading the linked guide on proposals I understood I should have done it myself. If someone else should have done it then no worries, I must have misunderstood.
  Likes: 3 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: axel_t, opuser, izzy
  No replies yet.
• 0xged - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 9:53 p.m.
  Hey @AxlVaz! MakerDAO and LIDO are still marked as DRAFT, so they will not qualify for this round. … Hey @AxlVaz! MakerDAO and LIDO are still marked as DRAFT, so they will not qualify for this round. I guess there will be another date for the next round. Deadline for this submition was June 23 rd, so either they didn’t get in time, or they were planning for next round already. I guess they were too optimistic.
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• Axel_T - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 10:01 p.m.
  Hi @lefterisjp I noticed your issue too. For some reason you were the only [READY] Proposal that di… Hi @lefterisjp I noticed your issue too. For some reason you were the only [READY] Proposal that didn’t make it into the voting round? And yes, from my own tracking, it was set as READY around 24 hours ago (and before other Proposals who did end up making it into the vote). Finally, FYI: For my Proposal, I personally changed it from DRAFT to READY, so that shouldn’t be the issue with yours either. Hope you get the explanation you seek. Kind regards, Axel
  Likes: 0 Replies: 1

  View More
  No likes yet.
  Replies:

  • lefterisjp: I mean it’s kind of fine, if it gets pushed to the next round (so long as there is OP left ). Would just like to know what I did wrong and which rule I broke since I spent quite some time to make sure all rules were followed. It’s already a lot of proposals for delegates to think on! I am also a delegate and I have not even read half of the proposals yet. Pushing our proposal further does make a big difference to us as it means we will have to switch our planning and have a potentially big project on a “maybe” basis for whenever next round ends. As an opensource project whose main source of income is grants having a clear answer (yes or no) for funding a potential big project is crucial.
• lefterisjp - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 10:17 p.m.
  I mean it’s kind of fine, if it gets pushed to the next round (so long as there is OP left :joy:). … I mean it’s kind of fine, if it gets pushed to the next round (so long as there is OP left :joy:). Would just like to know what I did wrong and which rule I broke since I spent quite some time to make sure all rules were followed. It’s already a lot of proposals for delegates to think on! I am also a delegate and I have not even read half of the proposals yet. Pushing our proposal further does make a big difference to us as it means we will have to switch our planning and have a potentially big project on a “maybe” basis for whenever next round ends. As an opensource project whose main source of income is grants having a clear answer (yes or no) for funding a potential big project is crucial.
  Likes: 2 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: axel_t, maintainer.eth
  No replies yet.
• Cryptoz - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 10:29 p.m.
  They made a couple of mistakes like putting a project as delegator approved when it wasn’t and anot… They made a couple of mistakes like putting a project as delegator approved when it wasn’t and another project as not delegator approved when it was. It does though seem a bit more severe missing an entire proposal! They still need to fix the other mistakes so maybe there is time to add you :crossed_fingers: Edit: I have just noticed they are going to also need to update the snapshot vote for the projects mentioned further up in this discussion since its wrong there also. It looks like having delegator approved makes a difference for general voters when selecting to support a proposal or not.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: lefterisjp
  No replies yet.
• OPUser - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 11:17 p.m.
  As we are closing Phase 0 and starting the vote on Phase 1 , I have shared some thoughts on “Acco… As we are closing Phase 0 and starting the vote on Phase 1 , I have shared some thoughts on “Accountability” of token being distributed to the project(s), would love to hear your opinion and feedback. Accountability of Phase 0 / 1 Funds given to projects Grants Phase 0 has officially ended and soon team will unlock 36 M OP token and distribute it to the Phase 0 projects. Same steps will happen for Phase 1 projects when voting will end for Phase 1 . Similar to Phase 0 proposals, I have gone through all the Phase 1 Proposals, I have followed them, suggested them something and learned something from them. Now, I will cast my vote and would like to know how the project(s) are spending those token given to them. Some are saying I can follow the token recip… Admin, please delete this comment if this thread is not the right place to share this.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: axlvaz
  No replies yet.
• AxlVaz - No Role

  June 23, 2022, 11:22 p.m.
  Check this document where you can see the proposals to vote, it will be updated? I have seen that s… Check this document where you can see the proposals to vote, it will be updated? I have seen that some last minute proposals have been submitted such as MakerDAO and LIDO. We should be clearer with the steps or there should be a pre-selection before dumping the proposals to snapshot.
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• 0xged - No Role

  June 24, 2022, 1:53 a.m.
  Hey @AxlVaz! MakerDAO and LIDO are still marked as DRAFT, so they will not qualify for this round. … Hey @AxlVaz! MakerDAO and LIDO are still marked as DRAFT, so they will not qualify for this round. I guess there will be another date for the next round. Deadline for this submition was June 23 rd, so either they didn’t get in time, or they were planning for next round already. I guess they were too optimistic.
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• marc - No Role

  June 24, 2022, 5:42 a.m.
  Candide is also missing from the list. It was marked as Ready on June 23 after being reviewed for… Candide is also missing from the list. It was marked as Ready on June 23 after being reviewed for feedback and signalled to be ready for voting by at least one delegate. [READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Candide Wallet Governance Fund: Phase 1 Project Name: Candide Author Name: @marc Number of OP tokens requested: OP 190 k L 2 Recipient Address: 0 xA 60 b 3402051 eC 75 B 17 abb 81 b 4 c 92 BF 88 d 5 e 49 Aa 8 Relevant Usage Metrics: (TVL, transactions, volume, unique addresses, etc.) N/A new product Introduction Token management across different networks is a cumbersome process. Although many bridges have emerged to offer connectivity across networks, the manual process of bridging assets can be quite laborious. If Ethereum were to scale and to become…
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• marc - No Role

  June 24, 2022, 9:42 a.m.
  Candide is also missing from the list. It was marked as Ready on June 23 after being reviewed for… Candide is also missing from the list. It was marked as Ready on June 23 after being reviewed for feedback and signalled to be ready for voting by at least one delegate. [READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Candide Wallet Governance Fund: Phase 1 Project Name: Candide Author Name: @marc Number of OP tokens requested: OP 190 k L 2 Recipient Address: 0 xA 60 b 3402051 eC 75 B 17 abb 81 b 4 c 92 BF 88 d 5 e 49 Aa 8 Relevant Usage Metrics: (TVL, transactions, volume, unique addresses, etc.) N/A new product Introduction Token management across different networks is a cumbersome process. Although many bridges have emerged to offer connectivity across networks, the manual process of bridging assets can be quite laborious. If Ethereum were to scale and to become…
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• Cryptoz - No Role

  June 24, 2022, 10:29 a.m.
  I think it would be a good idea to have a thread or a channel on discord where delegators can post … I think it would be a good idea to have a thread or a channel on discord where delegators can post what projects they support and edit their support for a project up until the voting begins. This way it wont cause the current issue seen in this vote were projects supported by delegators show as not supported and projects not supported by delegators shows as supported. It makes a big difference when people are voting for proposals as these mistakes could make or break a proposal.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: ben-chain
  No replies yet.
• thesleeper - No Role

  June 24, 2022, 12:47 p.m.
  at first to break the ice someone just made a proposal out of nothing, we have to see more good pro… at first to break the ice someone just made a proposal out of nothing, we have to see more good proposal to improve it
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• Cryptoz - No Role

  June 24, 2022, 2:29 p.m.
  I think it would be a good idea to have a thread or a channel on discord where delegators can post … I think it would be a good idea to have a thread or a channel on discord where delegators can post what projects they support and edit their support for a project up until the voting begins. This way it wont cause the current issue seen in this vote were projects supported by delegators show as not supported and projects not supported by delegators shows as supported. It makes a big difference when people are voting for proposals as these mistakes could make or break a proposal.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: ben-chain
  No replies yet.
• ben-chain - This user is a moderator

  June 24, 2022, 3:58 p.m.
  Hi all, the above feedback on readiness and approvals have been incorporated with modifications to/… Hi all, the above feedback on readiness and approvals have been incorporated with modifications to/additions of Proposals K, P and Q. Before the next cycle, so that we’re not in this position again, we’ll include an update to the OPerating manual to better specify the cutoffs and include a buffer between the cutoff and the next cycle start. Will also include more explicit delegate sign-off measures, again to limit repeated confusion.
  Likes: 4 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: lefterisjp, OPUser, Cryptoz, marc
  No replies yet.
• thesleeper - No Role

  June 24, 2022, 4:47 p.m.
  at first to break the ice someone just made a proposal out of nothing, we have to see more good pro… at first to break the ice someone just made a proposal out of nothing, we have to see more good proposal to improve it
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• ben-chain - No Role

  June 24, 2022, 7:58 p.m.
  Hi all, the above feedback on readiness and approvals have been incorporated with modifications to/… Hi all, the above feedback on readiness and approvals have been incorporated with modifications to/additions of Proposals K, P and Q. Before the next cycle, so that we’re not in this position again, we’ll include an update to the OPerating manual to better specify the cutoffs and include a buffer between the cutoff and the next cycle start. Will also include more explicit delegate sign-off measures, again to limit repeated confusion.
  Likes: 4 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: lefterisjp, opuser, cryptoz, marc
  No replies yet.
• simple8720 - No Role

  June 25, 2022, 12:05 p.m.
  hi, its coming ~~ go ahead hi, its coming ~~ go ahead
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• komaw22000 - No Role

  June 25, 2022, 2:25 p.m.
  I am wanting to vote with my op funds since the person I delegated to @tongnk has not voted for wha… I am wanting to vote with my op funds since the person I delegated to @tongnk has not voted for what I would like to see. How can I vote in this round and remove my support for him as delegate?
  Likes: 3 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: Axel_T, famassed, Cryptoz
  No replies yet.
• chooose - No Role

  June 25, 2022, 4:05 p.m.
  hi, its coming ~~ go ahead hi, its coming ~~ go ahead
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• Axel_T - No Role

  June 25, 2022, 6:18 p.m.
  It’s very sad to see how pessimistic the voting community has been in the first three days of votin… It’s very sad to see how pessimistic the voting community has been in the first three days of voting. Here are 17 groups of people who are ready to dedicate their careers to the Optimism Collective and attempt to drive the growth and usage of OP …Yet the Voters are like, “Nah, you’re not welcome here. Don’t bother.” to all but the predictable 4 or 5 of these groups?! So far, this appears to be hardly the welcoming, inclusive and positive community that was promised, that works in solidarity to realise the vision of Web 3 . In fact, it appears to be quite the opposite. Sad, and kind of disheartening. I hope my thoughts above are proven wrong in the final 11 days of voting. Cheers, Axel
  Likes: 3 Replies: 2

  View More
  Likers: solarcurve, Cryptoz, 0xWeston
  Replies:

  • famassed: I see projects with a lot of yes voters but there are some big delegates that seem to not be reviewing projects and just voting no on everything but the 1 project they are trying to get past!
  • 0xWeston: I hear you, see what you mean, and am working hard to make sure this is made right.
• komaw22000 - No Role

  June 25, 2022, 6:25 p.m.
  I am wanting to vote with my op funds since the person I delegated to @tongnk has not voted for wha… I am wanting to vote with my op funds since the person I delegated to @tongnk has not voted for what I would like to see. How can I vote in this round and remove my support for him as delegate?
  Likes: 3 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: axel_t, famassed, cryptoz
  No replies yet.
• famassed - No Role

  June 25, 2022, 6:40 p.m.
  I see projects with a lot of yes voters but there are some big delegates that seem to not be review… I see projects with a lot of yes voters but there are some big delegates that seem to not be reviewing projects and just voting no on everything but the 1 project they are trying to get past!
  Likes: 3 Replies: 2

  View More
  Likers: Axel_T, Cryptoz, 0xzenodotus
  Replies:

  • Axel_T: Or at least if some of the more powerful, early voters had been less pessimistic and had voted ‘Yes’, then a new/different psychological ‘anchor’ would have been set for everyone logging into Snapshot, and the anchoring effect would mean all projects would have a lot more general, less powerful ‘Yes’ voters.
  • Cryptoz: I have noticed a few delegates voting NO for their competitors in some cases or voting for a project which they support in the similar category and voting for something similar with NO. I agree with others that there needs to be a committee on ensuring delegators are held accountable in decisions and removed from been able to make biased decisions. A couple of delegators active here have ABSTAINED, but others have not!
• WuBitcoin - No Role

  June 25, 2022, 7:37 p.m.
  dForce has started liquidity mining in optimism, and the yield is very high. I hope dForce can get … dForce has started liquidity mining in optimism, and the yield is very high. I hope dForce can get OP incentives to attract more users and higher TVL for the optimism ecosystem.Support better projects like dForce!
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: Mindao
  No replies yet.
• Axel_T - No Role

  June 25, 2022, 10:02 p.m.
  Or at least if some of the more powerful, early voters had been less pessimistic and had voted ‘Yes… Or at least if some of the more powerful, early voters had been less pessimistic and had voted ‘Yes’, then a new/different psychological ‘anchor’ would have been set for everyone logging into Snapshot, and the anchoring effect would mean all projects would have a lot more general, less powerful ‘Yes’ voters.
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• Axel_T - No Role

  June 25, 2022, 10:18 p.m.
  It’s very sad to see how pessimistic the voting community has been in the first three days of votin… It’s very sad to see how pessimistic the voting community has been in the first three days of voting. Here are 17 groups of people who are ready to dedicate their careers to the Optimism Collective and attempt to drive the growth and usage of OP …Yet the Voters are like, “Nah, you’re not welcome here. Don’t bother.” to all but the predictable 4 or 5 of these groups?! So far, this appears to be hardly the welcoming, inclusive and positive community that was promised, that works in solidarity to realise the vision of Web 3 . In fact, it appears to be quite the opposite. Sad, and kind of disheartening. I hope my thoughts above are proven wrong in the final 11 days of voting. Cheers, Axel
  Likes: 3 Replies: 2

  View More
  Likers: solarcurve, cryptoz, 0xweston
  Replies:

  • famassed: I see projects with a lot of yes voters but there are some big delegates that seem to not be reviewing projects and just voting no on everything but the 1 project they are trying to get past!
  • 0xWeston: I hear you, see what you mean, and am working hard to make sure this is made right.
• famassed - No Role

  June 25, 2022, 10:40 p.m.
  I see projects with a lot of yes voters but there are some big delegates that seem to not be review… I see projects with a lot of yes voters but there are some big delegates that seem to not be reviewing projects and just voting no on everything but the 1 project they are trying to get past!
  Likes: 3 Replies: 2

  View More
  Likers: axel_t, cryptoz, 0xzenodotus
  Replies:

  • Axel_T: Or at least if some of the more powerful, early voters had been less pessimistic and had voted ‘Yes’, then a new/different psychological ‘anchor’ would have been set for everyone logging into Snapshot, and the anchoring effect would mean all projects would have a lot more general, less powerful ‘Yes’ voters.
  • Cryptoz: I have noticed a few delegates voting NO for their competitors in some cases or voting for a project which they support in the similar category and voting for something similar with NO. I agree with others that there needs to be a committee on ensuring delegators are held accountable in decisions and removed from been able to make biased decisions. A couple of delegators active here have ABSTAINED, but others have not!
• WuBitcoin - No Role

  June 25, 2022, 11:37 p.m.
  dForce has started liquidity mining in optimism, and the yield is very high. I hope dForce can get … dForce has started liquidity mining in optimism, and the yield is very high. I hope dForce can get OP incentives to attract more users and higher TVL for the optimism ecosystem.Support better projects like dForce!
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: mindao
  No replies yet.
• MGGYY - No Role

  June 26, 2022, 12:28 a.m.
  dForce (Proposal B) just launched liquidity mining on Optimism! Check out more through: twitter.c… dForce (Proposal B) just launched liquidity mining on Optimism! Check out more through: twitter.com @ Dear #dForcians! ? We are thrilled to announce that #dForce have launched liquidity mining initiative on @optimismPBC ?? 15 k $DF will be distributed per day ? Full Article? https://t.co/BXwNAz 54 PJ
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: Mindao
  No replies yet.
• Axel_T - No Role

  June 26, 2022, 2:02 a.m.
  Or at least if some of the more powerful, early voters had been less pessimistic and had voted ‘Yes… Or at least if some of the more powerful, early voters had been less pessimistic and had voted ‘Yes’, then a new/different psychological ‘anchor’ would have been set for everyone logging into Snapshot, and the anchoring effect would mean all projects would have a lot more general, less powerful ‘Yes’ voters.
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• MGGYY - No Role

  June 26, 2022, 4:28 a.m.
  dForce (Proposal B) just launched liquidity mining on Optimism! Check out more through: twitter.c… dForce (Proposal B) just launched liquidity mining on Optimism! Check out more through: twitter.com @ Dear #dForcians! ? We are thrilled to announce that #dForce have launched liquidity mining initiative on @optimismPBC ?? 15 k $DF will be distributed per day ? Full Article? https://t.co/BXwNAz 54 PJ
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: mindao
  No replies yet.
• Cryptoz - No Role

  June 26, 2022, 10:05 a.m.
  I have noticed a few delegates voting NO for their competitors in some cases or voting for a projec… I have noticed a few delegates voting NO for their competitors in some cases or voting for a project which they support in the similar category and voting for something similar with NO. I agree with others that there needs to be a committee on ensuring delegators are held accountable in decisions and removed from been able to make biased decisions. A couple of delegators active here have ABSTAINED, but others have not!
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: 0xzenodotus
  No replies yet.
• Cryptoz - No Role

  June 26, 2022, 2:05 p.m.
  I have noticed a few delegates voting NO for their competitors in some cases or voting for a projec… I have noticed a few delegates voting NO for their competitors in some cases or voting for a project which they support in the similar category and voting for something similar with NO. I agree with others that there needs to be a committee on ensuring delegators are held accountable in decisions and removed from been able to make biased decisions. A couple of delegators active here have ABSTAINED, but others have not!
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: 0xzenodotus
  No replies yet.
• nogahev839 - No Role

  June 26, 2022, 2:28 p.m.
  system: Proposal K: Infinity Wallet Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -pr… system: Proposal K: Infinity Wallet Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-infinity-wallet/ 2713 Approval: Voting Cycle # 2 : Roundup - # 17 by OPUser Note: This proposal’s delegate approval was miscommunicated in the initial generation of this list, and it was initially placed in the non-approved category. It appears here now in order of appearance (and in the correct category) but has been given the letter “K.” The proposal has been re-submitted to snapshot with updated text to reflect that it was indeed approved by a delegate. Il be voting for Infinity Wallet. Its the best wallet in the space by a far and will play a large role in mainstream crypto and defi adoption.
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• nogahev839 - No Role

  June 26, 2022, 6:28 p.m.
  system: Proposal K: Infinity Wallet Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -pr… system: Proposal K: Infinity Wallet Proposal: https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase- 1 -proposal-infinity-wallet/ 2713 Approval: Voting Cycle # 2 : Roundup - # 17 by OPUser Note: This proposal’s delegate approval was miscommunicated in the initial generation of this list, and it was initially placed in the non-approved category. It appears here now in order of appearance (and in the correct category) but has been given the letter “K.” The proposal has been re-submitted to snapshot with updated text to reflect that it was indeed approved by a delegate. Il be voting for Infinity Wallet. Its the best wallet in the space by a far and will play a large role in mainstream crypto and defi adoption.
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• polynya - No Role

  June 28, 2022, 5:29 a.m.
  I have voted for the current batch proposals, these are my final votes: Proposal A: Optimistic Rail… I have voted for the current batch proposals, these are my final votes: Proposal A: Optimistic Railway - Yes Proposal B: dForce - Yes Proposal C: GYSR - Abstain Proposal D: Mean Finance - Yes Proposal E: Raptor - No Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX - Yes Proposal G: Summa - Abstain Proposal H: WardenSwap - Yes Proposal I: Pickle Finance - Yes Proposal J: Ooki Protocol - No Proposal K: Infinity Wallet - Yes Proposal L: Beefy - No Proposal M: 0 xHabitat - Yes Proposal N: Thales - No Proposal O: ParaSwap - Yes Proposal P: Rotki - Yes Proposal Q: Candide - Yes I have submitted my brief feedback in their respective threads (except a couple that were no-brainers either way and others had covered everything I wanted to say).
  Likes: 4 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: OPUser, rustboot.eth, MGGYY, Cryptoz
  No replies yet.
• polynya - No Role

  June 28, 2022, 9:29 a.m.
  I have voted for the current batch proposals, these are my final votes: Proposal A: Optimistic Rail… I have voted for the current batch proposals, these are my final votes: Proposal A: Optimistic Railway - Yes Proposal B: dForce - Yes Proposal C: GYSR - Abstain Proposal D: Mean Finance - Yes Proposal E: Raptor - No Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX - Yes Proposal G: Summa - Abstain Proposal H: WardenSwap - Yes Proposal I: Pickle Finance - Yes Proposal J: Ooki Protocol - No Proposal K: Infinity Wallet - Yes Proposal L: Beefy - No Proposal M: 0 xHabitat - Yes Proposal N: Thales - No Proposal O: ParaSwap - Yes Proposal P: Rotki - Yes Proposal Q: Candide - Yes I have submitted my brief feedback in their respective threads (except a couple that were no-brainers either way and others had covered everything I wanted to say).
  Likes: 4 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: opuser, rustboot.eth, mggyy, cryptoz
  No replies yet.
• Bobbay_StableLab - No Role

  June 28, 2022, 9:45 a.m.
  Here are our votes for the current cycle. Proposal A: Optimistic Railway - No Proposal B: dForce - … Here are our votes for the current cycle. Proposal A: Optimistic Railway - No Proposal B: dForce - Yes Proposal C: GYSR - No Proposal D: Mean Finance - No Proposal E: Raptor - No Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX - Yes Proposal G: Summa - No Proposal H: WardenSwap - No Proposal I: Pickle Finance - Yes Proposal J: Ooki Protocol - No Proposal K: Infinity Wallet - Yes Proposal L: Beefy - No Proposal M: 0 xHabitat - No Proposal N: Thales - No Proposal O: ParaSwap - Yes Proposal P: Rotki - Yes Proposal Q: Candide - Yes Similar to polyna, we provided brief feedback in their respective threads and look forward to future rounds.
  Likes: 4 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: rustboot.eth, polynya, MGGYY, Cryptoz
  No replies yet.
• Bobbay_StableLab - No Role

  June 28, 2022, 1:45 p.m.
  Here are our votes for the current cycle. Proposal A: Optimistic Railway - No Proposal B: dForce - … Here are our votes for the current cycle. Proposal A: Optimistic Railway - No Proposal B: dForce - Yes Proposal C: GYSR - No Proposal D: Mean Finance - No Proposal E: Raptor - No Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX - Yes Proposal G: Summa - No Proposal H: WardenSwap - No Proposal I: Pickle Finance - Yes Proposal J: Ooki Protocol - No Proposal K: Infinity Wallet - Yes Proposal L: Beefy - No Proposal M: 0 xHabitat - No Proposal N: Thales - No Proposal O: ParaSwap - Yes Proposal P: Rotki - Yes Proposal Q: Candide - Yes Similar to polyna, we provided brief feedback in their respective threads and look forward to future rounds.
  Likes: 4 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: rustboot.eth, polynya, mggyy, cryptoz
  No replies yet.
• ScaleWeb3 - No Role

  June 29, 2022, 9:55 a.m.
  Here are our votes for the current cycle. Brief reasoning is given below the project proposals. Pro… Here are our votes for the current cycle. Brief reasoning is given below the project proposals. Proposal A: Optimistic Railway 1 - No Proposal B: dForce - Yes Proposal C: GYSR - No (Changed vote from Abstain to No) Proposal D: Mean Finance - Yes Proposal E: Raptor - No Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX 2 - Yes Proposal G: Summa - No Proposal H: WardenSwap - No Proposal I: Pickle Finance 2 - Yes Proposal J: Ooki Protocol 1 - No Proposal K: Infinity Wallet - No Proposal L: Beefy 1 - No Proposal M: 0 xHabitat - No Proposal N: Thales - No Proposal O: ParaSwap - Yes Proposal P: Rotki 1 - No Proposal Q: Candide 1 - No Overall, we were criticially looking at spending vs. potential return. We wanted to see some detail in proposals, clear value-add & alignment with the Optimism ecosystem. Consequently, there are projects we like but didn’t vote for this time, and we look forward to slightly adjusted proposals in the next Phases.
  Likes: 3 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: polynya, MGGYY, Cryptoz
  No replies yet.
• empera22r - No Role

  June 29, 2022, 10:44 a.m.
  so good Some really good proposals, and some really bad ones too so good Some really good proposals, and some really bad ones too
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: Cryptoz
  No replies yet.
• ScaleWeb3 - No Role

  June 29, 2022, 1:55 p.m.
  Here are our votes for the current cycle. Brief reasoning is given below the project proposals. Pro… Here are our votes for the current cycle. Brief reasoning is given below the project proposals. Proposal A: Optimistic Railway 1 - No Proposal B: dForce - Yes Proposal C: GYSR - No (Changed vote from Abstain to No) Proposal D: Mean Finance - Yes Proposal E: Raptor - No Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX 2 - Yes Proposal G: Summa - No Proposal H: WardenSwap - No Proposal I: Pickle Finance 2 - Yes Proposal J: Ooki Protocol 1 - No Proposal K: Infinity Wallet - No Proposal L: Beefy 1 - No Proposal M: 0 xHabitat - No Proposal N: Thales - No Proposal O: ParaSwap - Yes Proposal P: Rotki 1 - No Proposal Q: Candide 1 - No Overall, we were criticially looking at spending vs. potential return. We wanted to see some detail in proposals, clear value-add & alignment with the Optimism ecosystem. Consequently, there are projects we like but didn’t vote for this time, and we look forward to slightly adjusted proposals in the next Phases.
  Likes: 3 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: polynya, mggyy, cryptoz
  No replies yet.
• empera22r - No Role

  June 29, 2022, 2:44 p.m.
  so good Some really good proposals, and some really bad ones too so good Some really good proposals, and some really bad ones too
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: cryptoz
  No replies yet.
• OPUser - No Role

  June 29, 2022, 3:30 p.m.
  Proposal A: Optimistic Railway 4 - Yes Proposal B: dForce 1 - Yes Proposal C: GYSR 1 - No Pro… Proposal A: Optimistic Railway 4 - Yes Proposal B: dForce 1 - Yes Proposal C: GYSR 1 - No Proposal D: Mean Finance - Yes Proposal E: Raptor - No Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX - Yes Proposal G: Summa - No Proposal H: WardenSwap 1 - Yes Proposal I: Pickle Finance - Yes Proposal J: Ooki Protocol - No Proposal K: Infinity Wallet 1 - Yes Proposal L: Beefy - No Proposal M: 0 xHabitat - No Proposal N: Thales - No Proposal O: ParaSwap - Yes Proposal P: Rotki - Yes Proposal Q: Candide - Yes Few other suggestion(from Phase 1 ) that we need to improve on:- There should be exact date and time on when proposal will go live, not just the date but time too for example 12 PM CET, GMT or any time zone will work. This time there was lot of confusion. Would be great if delegate(s) took some of their time and provide feedback before the proposal goes to voting, I have see that many project(s) are quite active on their proposal, seeking feedback and willing to update and amend their proposal depending the feedback from users/delegates. What’s the point of giving suggestion when proposal is live, the project team cant amend the suggestion even if they want to, jumping it at the last moment is not helping anyone. There should be at least 24 hr cool down period before bringing proposals to voting, during this time the responsibility will be on project team to make sure that their proposal is adhering to all the requirement and is ready for voting, if they miss to do so, they will be accountable rather than OP Team or delegates. This one is for me but would like to mention, delegate should be precise in their word when providing their support to a proposal. We need some active participation from OP team on discord gov channel, during Phase 1 , I had few queries related to couple of proposal, I did post them on discord gov general channel but did not got any response from team. Again, as a delegate, its my responsibility to make a judgement call but little help here and there could help me make a better decision. If project submitting a proposal is not willing to submit a report on their last phase spending sighting extra and unnecessary work, I expect that OP Team should provide us with such a report. This is again just for me, I am not asking other do the same or suggesting on making this a rule but I am willing to invest my time looking at those report so that a. I can make better decision on the basis of those report. b. I would like to make sure that funds are being used properly ie. accountability. This is to the team submitting the proposal focusing on LP and airdrop, on “why the users will stay once incentives are over”; these two are my favorite line a. users will come for incentive and stay for the product b. we believe our project has this and this to offer and users will stay because of this I request you to understand this, those using L 2 as their main chain to do their transaction, we dont need someone to tell us about a unique and innovative project, its vice versa, we are looking for them. If I am using a platform just because of an incentive, I will use it as long as incentive exist but on the other hand I will continue to use if the platform is self-sustainable and rewarding me for using it, OP incentive are just a boost, if you need an extra incentive to sustain your project, you need to re-think your stagey. Again, my opinion, highly dependent on individual. See you all in Phase 2 . Cheers!
  Likes: 7 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: AxlVaz, polynya, ScaleWeb3, 0xWeston, MGGYY, Cryptoz, H_sama
  No replies yet.
• OPUser - No Role

  June 29, 2022, 7:30 p.m.
  Proposal A: Optimistic Railway 4 - Yes Proposal B: dForce 1 - Yes Proposal C: GYSR 1 - No Pro… Proposal A: Optimistic Railway 4 - Yes Proposal B: dForce 1 - Yes Proposal C: GYSR 1 - No Proposal D: Mean Finance - Yes Proposal E: Raptor - No Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX - Yes Proposal G: Summa - No Proposal H: WardenSwap 1 - Yes Proposal I: Pickle Finance - Yes Proposal J: Ooki Protocol - No Proposal K: Infinity Wallet 1 - Yes Proposal L: Beefy - No Proposal M: 0 xHabitat - No Proposal N: Thales - No Proposal O: ParaSwap - Yes Proposal P: Rotki - Yes Proposal Q: Candide - Yes Few other suggestion(from Phase 1 ) that we need to improve on:- There should be exact date and time on when proposal will go live, not just the date but time too for example 12 PM CET, GMT or any time zone will work. This time there was lot of confusion. Would be great if delegate(s) took some of their time and provide feedback before the proposal goes to voting, I have see that many project(s) are quite active on their proposal, seeking feedback and willing to update and amend their proposal depending the feedback from users/delegates. What’s the point of giving suggestion when proposal is live, the project team cant amend the suggestion even if they want to, jumping it at the last moment is not helping anyone. There should be at least 24 hr cool down period before bringing proposals to voting, during this time the responsibility will be on project team to make sure that their proposal is adhering to all the requirement and is ready for voting, if they miss to do so, they will be accountable rather than OP Team or delegates. This one is for me but would like to mention, delegate should be precise in their word when providing their support to a proposal. We need some active participation from OP team on discord gov channel, during Phase 1 , I had few queries related to couple of proposal, I did post them on discord gov general channel but did not got any response from team. Again, as a delegate, its my responsibility to make a judgement call but little help here and there could help me make a better decision. If project submitting a proposal is not willing to submit a report on their last phase spending sighting extra and unnecessary work, I expect that OP Team should provide us with such a report. This is again just for me, I am not asking other do the same or suggesting on making this a rule but I am willing to invest my time looking at those report so that a. I can make better decision on the basis of those report. b. I would like to make sure that funds are being used properly ie. accountability. This is to the team submitting the proposal focusing on LP and airdrop, on “why the users will stay once incentives are over”; these two are my favorite line a. users will come for incentive and stay for the product b. we believe our project has this and this to offer and users will stay because of this I request you to understand this, those using L 2 as their main chain to do their transaction, we dont need someone to tell us about a unique and innovative project, its vice versa, we are looking for them. If I am using a platform just because of an incentive, I will use it as long as incentive exist but on the other hand I will continue to use if the platform is self-sustainable and rewarding me for using it, OP incentive are just a boost, if you need an extra incentive to sustain your project, you need to re-think your stagey. Again, my opinion, highly dependent on individual. See you all in Phase 2 . Cheers!
  Likes: 7 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: axlvaz, polynya, scaleweb3, 0xweston, mggyy, cryptoz, h_sama
  No replies yet.
• leivey - No Role

  June 30, 2022, 11:42 a.m.
  So Many proposals! More projects will build on OP So Many proposals! More projects will build on OP
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• leivey - No Role

  June 30, 2022, 3:42 p.m.
  So Many proposals! More projects will build on OP So Many proposals! More projects will build on OP
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• 0xWeston - No Role

  July 2, 2022, 11:09 p.m.
  I hear you, see what you mean, and am working hard to make sure this is made right. :red_circle: I hear you, see what you mean, and am working hard to make sure this is made right. :red_circle:
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: Axel_T
  No replies yet.
• 0xWeston - No Role

  July 3, 2022, 3:09 a.m.
  I hear you, see what you mean, and am working hard to make sure this is made right. :red_circle: I hear you, see what you mean, and am working hard to make sure this is made right. :red_circle:
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: axel_t
  No replies yet.
• Aris - No Role

  July 4, 2022, 6:56 a.m.
  Voting YES for Proposal O, Proposal D, Proposal F, Proposal H for now. Still considering other prop… Voting YES for Proposal O, Proposal D, Proposal F, Proposal H for now. Still considering other proposal.
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• OPUser - No Role

  July 4, 2022, 9:24 a.m.
  What is public good to you 8 , would appreciate your thoughts on it. What is public good to you 8 , would appreciate your thoughts on it.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: 0xzenodotus
  No replies yet.
• Aris - No Role

  July 4, 2022, 10:56 a.m.
  Voting YES for Proposal O, Proposal D, Proposal F, Proposal H for now. Still considering other prop… Voting YES for Proposal O, Proposal D, Proposal F, Proposal H for now. Still considering other proposal.
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• OPUser - No Role

  July 4, 2022, 1:24 p.m.
  What is public good to you 8 , would appreciate your thoughts on it. What is public good to you 8 , would appreciate your thoughts on it.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: 0xzenodotus
  No replies yet.
• krzkaczor - No Role

  July 6, 2022, 8:25 a.m.
  Summary of my votes: Proposal O: Paraswap 4 - YES Proposal A: Optimistic Railway 6 - NO Proposa… Summary of my votes: Proposal O: Paraswap 4 - YES Proposal A: Optimistic Railway 6 - NO Proposal B: dForce 2 - YES Proposal C: GYSR 1 - NO Proposal D: Mean Finance 2 - YES Proposal E: Raptor 1 - NO Proposal Q: Candide Wallet 4 - YES Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX 1 - YES Proposal G: Summa 3 - NO Proposal H: WardenSwap 14 - YES Proposal K: Infinity Wallet 1 - NO Proposal I: Pickle Finance 3 - NO Proposal P: Rotki 2 - YES Furthermore some feedback regarding this round: Finding a link to voting site shouldn’t be that hard. Proposals miss two critical pieces of information: what project does and what is the competitive landscape. If project assessment will continue to be the main objective of the governance, I would propose funding a core unit (a team that works for the DAO), responsible for doing all the leg work around proposals (fact checking, pulling more stats etc).
  Likes: 4 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: NicoProducto, Coco, Cryptoz, thesleeper
  No replies yet.
• krzkaczor - No Role

  July 6, 2022, 12:25 p.m.
  Summary of my votes: Proposal O: Paraswap 4 - YES Proposal A: Optimistic Railway 6 - NO Proposa… Summary of my votes: Proposal O: Paraswap 4 - YES Proposal A: Optimistic Railway 6 - NO Proposal B: dForce 2 - YES Proposal C: GYSR 1 - NO Proposal D: Mean Finance 2 - YES Proposal E: Raptor 1 - NO Proposal Q: Candide Wallet 4 - YES Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX 1 - YES Proposal G: Summa 3 - NO Proposal H: WardenSwap 14 - YES Proposal K: Infinity Wallet 1 - NO Proposal I: Pickle Finance 3 - NO Proposal P: Rotki 2 - YES Furthermore some feedback regarding this round: Finding a link to voting site shouldn’t be that hard. Proposals miss two critical pieces of information: what project does and what is the competitive landscape. If project assessment will continue to be the main objective of the governance, I would propose funding a core unit (a team that works for the DAO), responsible for doing all the leg work around proposals (fact checking, pulling more stats etc).
  Likes: 5 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: nicoproducto, coco, nextstepdeal, cryptoz, thesleeper
  No replies yet.
• woj.eth - No Role

  July 7, 2022, 9:14 a.m.
  My vote breakdown: Proposal A: Optimistic Railway - NO :x: $ 200 k requested, no links to previous … My vote breakdown: Proposal A: Optimistic Railway - NO :x: $ 200 k requested, no links to previous work, project more likely to be a startup rather than a public good. 90 % of the funding will go to the core team without any verification Proposal B: dForce - NO :x: $ 150 k requested, no links to previous work, project more likely to be a startup rather than a public good. Money would be spent on liquidity mining, marketing (??) and developer ecosystem with no oversight Proposal C: GYSR - NO :x: $ 200 k requested, no links to previous work. 25 % of it be spent of maintenance of already deployed system. Rest will go to “incentives” in different parts of the protocol. Proposal D: Mean Finance - NO :x: $ 150 k requested. 45 % of it will go to cover fees from the users (so… will go straight to the protocol’s revenue??), 20 % will go for “growth”. Project more likely to be a startup rather than a public good Proposal E: Raptor - NO :x: $ 400 k requested. This one is actually interesting! I wanted to vote yes, but there is no way of providing an oversight over this system and OP could do the very same thing and just setup eth 2 validators without funding raptor Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX - NO :x: $ 250 k requested. 100 % will go to some very complicated ponzinomics related to liquidity mining. I’m not a fan of increased speculative “adoption” — my OP mandate is to fund social & identity public goods Proposal G: Summa - NO :x: $ 1 m requested, for… an accounting service? Also no previous work done. I don’t know what’s happening here Proposal H: WardenSwap - NO :x: $ 150 k requested. 20 % goes to “traders” and 45 % for different growth strategies. The project is a DEX aggregator that ~probably~ charges fees. Not a public good Proposal I: Pickle Finance - NO :x: $ 100 k requested. 100 % goes to liquidity rewards in vaults that currently have $ 115 k TVL on optimism. This proposal is just asking to put OP tokens into pockets of pickle users? Proposal J: Ooki Protocol - NO :x: $ 350 k requested. It’s a trading / speculative product, it is also probably not a public good. Proposal K: Infinity Wallet - NO :x: $ 500 k requested. 15 % will be spent on an airdrop :man_facepalming:, rest very vague. No oversight & it’s probably also not a public good Proposal L: Beefy - NO :x: $ 325 k requested. 90 % for boosting yield in their products. Not a public good Proposal M: 0 xHabitat - NO :x: $ 200 k requested. The app hasn’t been deployed yet, i don’t really know how will benefit from it and how. 90 % to be vaguely spent on “incentives” and “developer grants”. Proposal N: Thales - NO :x: $ 1 m requested. Everything will be spent on trading incentives and competitions. Not a public good Proposal O: ParaSwap - NO :x: $ 225 k requested. ParaSwap is a company that charges everybody on swaps. 50 % of the funding will go into growing their ecosystem and integrating their FOR PROFIT system into more apps. Proposal P: Rotki - YES :white_check_mark: $ 95 k requested. My only “yes” and I am beyond happy to see here at least one true OSS, public good project. @LefterisJP is a developer with a long & great reputation, the budget breakdown is excellent and rotki is stellar example of a project built with a decentralization, privacy and resilience in mind. Portfolio management is also outside of my OP mandate (social & web 3 identity public goods) but im giving rotki a pass since it’s clearly the best project in the round Proposal Q: Candide - NO :x: $ 95 k requested. I respect the proposal and the author & believe it has a good potential — however, as for today, it’s essentially a vc investment without a clear benefit for the community or public goods. General feedback: I am new to governing over funds on this scale, but why is it a norm that we are just sending $ 100 k-$ 1 m based on a forum post & send that to a private address without any oversight? I feel like i could write a very well sounding anon proposal and just get a life-changing money from Optimism Collective without delivering any value. I only hold a small share of voting power ( 0 . 29 %) and my NOs don’t mean much, but it looks like this round will fund many projects that can rug and run with the money any time. Most of the applying projects are not public goods. At best some of them are legit crypto startups, at worst they are plain cash grabs without anything built yet. Proposals lack links to projects and author’s reputation. With 17 proposals it’s hard to read (sometimes very convoluted) descriptions and pitches. Proposal authors should be encouraged to leave more links. My voting mandate is to support decentralized identity & web 3 social projects. I’m more than happy to work & help polish proposals for them in next rounds, but I haven’t seen any so far. Also posted the breakdown on twitter: https://twitter.com/wojtekwtf/status/ 1545028162072956934 2
  Likes: 2 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: Cryptoz, Jrocki
  No replies yet.
• OPUser - No Role

  July 7, 2022, 11:47 a.m.
  My comment is not related to your approval process or on your decision. After reading your comment,… My comment is not related to your approval process or on your decision. After reading your comment, I just want to mention that, it seems that you are focusing more on public good which is not the goal of governance fund. For public funding we have separate budget which is not live, yet.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: woj.eth
  No replies yet.
• woj.eth - No Role

  July 7, 2022, 1:14 p.m.
  My vote breakdown: Proposal A: Optimistic Railway - NO :x: $ 200 k requested, no links to previous … My vote breakdown: Proposal A: Optimistic Railway - NO :x: $ 200 k requested, no links to previous work, project more likely to be a startup rather than a public good. 90 % of the funding will go to the core team without any verification Proposal B: dForce - NO :x: $ 150 k requested, no links to previous work, project more likely to be a startup rather than a public good. Money would be spent on liquidity mining, marketing (??) and developer ecosystem with no oversight Proposal C: GYSR - NO :x: $ 200 k requested, no links to previous work. 25 % of it be spent of maintenance of already deployed system. Rest will go to “incentives” in different parts of the protocol. Proposal D: Mean Finance - NO :x: $ 150 k requested. 45 % of it will go to cover fees from the users (so… will go straight to the protocol’s revenue??), 20 % will go for “growth”. Project more likely to be a startup rather than a public good Proposal E: Raptor - NO :x: $ 400 k requested. This one is actually interesting! I wanted to vote yes, but there is no way of providing an oversight over this system and OP could do the very same thing and just setup eth 2 validators without funding raptor Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX - NO :x: $ 250 k requested. 100 % will go to some very complicated ponzinomics related to liquidity mining. I’m not a fan of increased speculative “adoption” — my OP mandate is to fund social & identity public goods Proposal G: Summa - NO :x: $ 1 m requested, for… an accounting service? Also no previous work done. I don’t know what’s happening here Proposal H: WardenSwap - NO :x: $ 150 k requested. 20 % goes to “traders” and 45 % for different growth strategies. The project is a DEX aggregator that ~probably~ charges fees. Not a public good Proposal I: Pickle Finance - NO :x: $ 100 k requested. 100 % goes to liquidity rewards in vaults that currently have $ 115 k TVL on optimism. This proposal is just asking to put OP tokens into pockets of pickle users? Proposal J: Ooki Protocol - NO :x: $ 350 k requested. It’s a trading / speculative product, it is also probably not a public good. Proposal K: Infinity Wallet - NO :x: $ 500 k requested. 15 % will be spent on an airdrop :man_facepalming:, rest very vague. No oversight & it’s probably also not a public good Proposal L: Beefy - NO :x: $ 325 k requested. 90 % for boosting yield in their products. Not a public good Proposal M: 0 xHabitat - NO :x: $ 200 k requested. The app hasn’t been deployed yet, i don’t really know how will benefit from it and how. 90 % to be vaguely spent on “incentives” and “developer grants”. Proposal N: Thales - NO :x: $ 1 m requested. Everything will be spent on trading incentives and competitions. Not a public good Proposal O: ParaSwap - NO :x: $ 225 k requested. ParaSwap is a company that charges everybody on swaps. 50 % of the funding will go into growing their ecosystem and integrating their FOR PROFIT system into more apps. Proposal P: Rotki - YES :white_check_mark: $ 95 k requested. My only “yes” and I am beyond happy to see here at least one true OSS, public good project. @LefterisJP is a developer with a long & great reputation, the budget breakdown is excellent and rotki is stellar example of a project built with a decentralization, privacy and resilience in mind. Portfolio management is also outside of my OP mandate (social & web 3 identity public goods) but im giving rotki a pass since it’s clearly the best project in the round Proposal Q: Candide - NO :x: $ 95 k requested. I respect the proposal and the author & believe it has a good potential — however, as for today, it’s essentially a vc investment without a clear benefit for the community or public goods. General feedback: I am new to governing over funds on this scale, but why is it a norm that we are just sending $ 100 k-$ 1 m based on a forum post & send that to a private address without any oversight? I feel like i could write a very well sounding anon proposal and just get a life-changing money from Optimism Collective without delivering any value. I only hold a small share of voting power ( 0 . 29 %) and my NOs don’t mean much, but it looks like this round will fund many projects that can rug and run with the money any time. Most of the applying projects are not public goods. At best some of them are legit crypto startups, at worst they are plain cash grabs without anything built yet. Proposals lack links to projects and author’s reputation. With 17 proposals it’s hard to read (sometimes very convoluted) descriptions and pitches. Proposal authors should be encouraged to leave more links. My voting mandate is to support decentralized identity & web 3 social projects. I’m more than happy to work & help polish proposals for them in next rounds, but I haven’t seen any so far. Also posted the breakdown on twitter: https://twitter.com/wojtekwtf/status/ 1545028162072956934 2
  Likes: 2 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: cryptoz, jrocki.bedrock
  No replies yet.
• woj.eth - No Role

  July 7, 2022, 1:26 p.m.
  oh, good to know! feedback still stands for the public goods funding round. are there any guideline… oh, good to know! feedback still stands for the public goods funding round. are there any guidelines for this round of funding?
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• OPUser - No Role

  July 7, 2022, 3:47 p.m.
  My comment is not related to your approval process or on your decision. After reading your comment,… My comment is not related to your approval process or on your decision. After reading your comment, I just want to mention that, it seems that you are focusing more on public good which is not the goal of governance fund. For public funding we have separate budget which is not live, yet.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: woj.eth
  No replies yet.
• woj.eth - No Role

  July 7, 2022, 5:26 p.m.
  oh, good to know! feedback still stands for the public goods funding round. are there any guideline… oh, good to know! feedback still stands for the public goods funding round. are there any guidelines for this round of funding?
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• Cryptoz - No Role

  July 10, 2022, 1:21 p.m.
  I believe round 1 is for any proposals that will bring growth and drive adoption of Optimism. Ope… I believe round 1 is for any proposals that will bring growth and drive adoption of Optimism. Open source projects would be part of the public good funding when that launches. You can find some information in this forum some place, but can’t remember where. Edit: Some more information can be found here OP Allocations | Optimism Docs 3 and also above in this thread
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: woj.eth
  No replies yet.
• Cryptoz - No Role

  July 10, 2022, 5:21 p.m.
  I believe round 1 is for any proposals that will bring growth and drive adoption of Optimism. Ope… I believe round 1 is for any proposals that will bring growth and drive adoption of Optimism. Open source projects would be part of the public good funding when that launches. You can find some information in this forum some place, but can’t remember where. Edit: Some more information can be found here OP Allocations | Optimism Docs 3 and also above in this thread
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0

  View More
  Likers: woj.eth
  No replies yet.
• yyw - No Role

  July 14, 2022, 11:44 a.m.
  cool，Mean Finance, good choice. cool，Mean Finance, good choice.
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• yyw - No Role

  July 14, 2022, 3:44 p.m.
  cool，Mean Finance, good choice. cool，Mean Finance, good choice.
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• thesleeper - No Role

  Aug. 3, 2022, 12:32 a.m.
  definitely vote for Mean finance and wardenswap definitely vote for Mean finance and wardenswap
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• thesleeper - No Role

  Aug. 3, 2022, 4:32 a.m.
  definitely vote for Mean finance and wardenswap definitely vote for Mean finance and wardenswap
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• KnightWhiteH - No Role

  Dec. 8, 2022, 7:37 a.m.
  I will start voting right now :grinning: I will start voting right now :grinning:
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• KnightWhiteH - No Role

  Dec. 8, 2022, 12:37 p.m.
  I will start voting right now :grinning: I will start voting right now :grinning:
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0

  View More
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.