GM and thank you for sharing your feedback!
While amending the Charter of the ACC for Season 7, we have discussed your feedback in depth and have incorporated some of these aspects directly in the amended charter, and have introduced some of these as responsibilities of the Season 7 ACC.
I will address some of the other feedback:
Additional Goal 1: I think I am missing context here. I did not find mention elsewhere that one of the goals of the ACC was to increase the votable supply. I see that the ACC may “Research, analyze, and advocate for transparency related to the distribution of voting power,” but in my interpretation that does not necessarily mean increasing votable supply. It would be helpful to include a reference or link to where the votable supply goal has been established.
You are right that the KPI’s of Season 6 ACC did not specifically include increasing votable supply. It was a goal of Season 5 of the ACC, which was later removed for Season 6 ACC, and hence marked as “Aligned Goals” in the Retrospective, however going forward the ACC will be setting its KPI’s in the ACC’s Internal Operating Procedures directly to the measurable impact derived from the work done by the ACC.
It would be nice to see the result (impact) of the flags the ACC raised. What was the outcome? Similarly, I would love to see a description of the result of the ACC’s feedback provided to Agora. Did those suggestions get implemented? If not, what was the blocker?
With regards to these, the outcome are as follows:
-
For the Granite Network Upgrade issues, the feedback was conveyed to the OPLabs developers, however the OPLabs deactivating fraud proofs was as per the Security policy adopted by OPLabs. There are both pro’s and con’s to this approach. So while it is justified and in accordance with the Security Policy, it could still result in a situation that could cause severe harm to the network if exploited by a nefarious party, while fraud proofs are in a disabled state. To conclusively address this would entail OPLabs making changes to their Security Policy.
-
For the feedback to Agora, Agora had informed the ACC that they had made changes to their UI/UX that would present the voting options in a more clear and concise manner for the Delegates to vote on, and the error faced by Delegates would not arise once these changes go live. The UI changes was demonstrated to the ACC Members during a discussion with the Agora team. After these changes were implemented on the Optimism Agora Voting Portal, none of the Delegates had reported experiencing the same issues again in the season. While the ACC had also suggested exploring a re-vote mechanism for delegates, this would have entailed additional costs to Agora. At that point of time we felt would not completely justify the effort spent towards this, unless Delegates reported further instances of the same issue arising.
Nice work on these solutions! (1) and (3) are particularly valuable, in my opinion, and worth exploring further. Given its role in consistently observing and watching out for capture, the ACC likely has a unique perspective on decentralization progress and things to watch out for. And dry runs or scenario planning / practice is a great idea that I’d recommend strongly considering adding to the responsibilities next season.
On these points, the S7 ACC Charter has included exploring dry-run scenario, brainstorming potential capture situations, and also assisting with the decentralization roadmap as part of its Charter.
As a balancing note for (1), however, I would want to be careful to not overload the ACC’s capacity/attention and in any way diminish its ability to respond to capture scenarios.
This is definitely a consideration in the ACC Charter, and a fine needle to thread. The ACC does benefit immensely from high context delegates sharing their inputs across several domains in which they have expertise in.
Thank you once again for your valuable feedback! Looking forward to your feedback on the Season 7 ACC Charter.