Following @GFXlabs and @OPUser initiatives, this is our thread with all our relevant decisions and participation in OP governance.
DeFi LATAM is a spanish speaker community for the Web3 & crypto ecosystem, focused on education and adoption of users in Latin America under the values of decentralization and towards the future of internet. We detect the potential of Ethereum’s scaling solutions for our region and for this reason we have decided to be a representative voice of the ideas and interests of this increasingly growing community in this part of the world.
Read our full presentation in Delegate Commitments thread here.
With the help of numerous contributors and member of DeFi LATAM and Optimism Español, every decision made on behalf of DeFi LATAM in governance is discussed, agreed upon and communicated to all those interested in participating through our discussion channels on Discord:
Participation in the forum’s discussion threads in daily activities are own opinions of the delegate and contributors in their way to keep up with their roles and commitment to the governance; use of “we” or “us” shall apply when representing decisions or communications arising from the community, such as voting decisions and proposal submissions, all through this profile.
Special thanks to PEPO, Cryptochica, our contributors @Defi_LATAM_axlvaz, @NicoEsp, @Netrim, @994.eth, all our community and people from Latin America who support us!
Governance Fund Phase 0 voting decisions:
Proposal A - Batch Vote: For.
Reasons: we are ok supporting this proposal to start encouraging the growth of the optimism ecosystem. While we don’t agree with the vote taking place in a single batch, there is no reason to reject it among the 24 listed proposals included here.
Proposal B - Uniswap: Against.
Reasons: did not follow the guidelines.
Proposal C - 0x: Against.
Reasons: did not follow the guidelines.
Governance Fund Phase 1 voting decisions:
Proposal A: Optimistic Railway: No
Reasons: in a very early stage, without clarity of what kind of positive impact it can have on the ecosystem.
Proposal B: dForce: Yes
Reasons: protocol of the first to deploy in Optimism. Acceptable proposal and detailed.
Proposal C: GYSR: No
Reasons: Amount higher than its potential use case. No clear strategy.
Proposal D: Mean Finance: Yes
Reasons: a one-of-a-kind protocol. Reasonable distribution. This project is well known and supported in our region.
Proposal E: Raptor: No
Reasons: does not apply to this phase.
Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX: Yes
Reasons: reasonable proposal in general terms, it seems positive to us.
Proposal G: Summa: No
Reasons: it doesn’t make sense at this stage, they ask for an excessive amount of tokens.
Proposal H: WardenSwap: No
Reasons: DEX aggregator. Not very interesting proposal. It would be good to see the deployment first to judge better.
Proposal I: Pickle Finance: Yes
Reasons: known team and protocol, reasonable proposal.
Proposal J: Ooki Protocol: No
Reasons: excessive amount for the protocol use case (see metrics in other chains). Author does not ensure co-incentives.
Proposal K: Infinity Wallet: Abstain
Reasons: difficult to evaluate, we leave it to the rest of the voters to establish their criteria.
Proposal L: Beefy: No
Reasons: excessive amount according to distribution. Not deployed at the time of decision.
Proposal M: 0xHabitat: No
Reasons: from our perspective they should finish defining ideas and deploying in Optimism. Happy to re-evaluate later.
Proposal N: Thales: No
Reasons: this project received funding from Phase 0. Distribution has not started yet. It’s counterproductive to approve new funds without evaluating the use of previous funds.
Proposal O: Paraswap: Yes
Reasons: reasonable proposal.
Proposal P: Roki: Yes
Reasons: well detailed proposal, interesting use case. Reasonable.
Proposal Q: Candide: Yes
Reasons: wallet focused on Rollups, with innovative features. Experimental proposal.
In an effort made by community members, we have made a proposal to improve significatly the phase 1 templates:
Update of the PHASE 1 protocol nomination template.
Today our 2nd Governance Call was held after a past week as timeframe to discuss the proposals of cycle #3. In this call we settled our discussions and vote as a community. The results can be found below with details and our feedbacks following the links:
- Proposal A: Superfluid: Yes.
- Proposal B: Kromatika: No.
- Proposal C: Hundred Finance: No.
- Proposal D: Biconomy: Yes.
- Proposal E: Dope Wars: No.
- Proposal F: Infinity Wallet: No.
- Proposal G: DexGuru: No.
- Proposal H: Overnightfi: No.
- Proposal I: Saddle Finance: No.
Despite significant negative votes, we believe that our feedback and that of other delegates and community can be useful for several proposals to be successful in passing in the next cycles.
Last friday we held the 3rd governance call on Discord to discuss the proposals for cycle 4. As in past calls, we focus on ratifying our decision as a community in the ongoing voting and also express opinions about the future of governance given the completion of Season 1.
Participants: ~26 (special thanks to Pacha for the design) + various other members during discussion week.
As result, our vote for cycle #4 has been as follows:
- Proposal A: Rocket Pool: Yes.
- Proposal B: Boardroom: Yes.
- Proposal C: dHedge: No.
- Proposal D: xToken Terminal and Gamma Strategies: No.
- Proposal E: Byte Mason Product Suite: No.
- Proposal F: GARD: No.
- Proposal G: Beefy Finance: Yes.
- Proposal H: BarnBridge: No.
- Proposal I: QiDao: Yes.
Please click on Yes/No to read our conclusions.
We commend the projects that took the time to consider the feedback from the community and delegates that led to some successful proposals passing. For the rest, keep working on the proper queries in the forum for the next cycle of Phase 1, see you in Season 2!
Today, we have formalized our participation in the formation of Governance Committees proposed for season 2 of Optimism governance.
Currently we’re part of two committees proposals as reviewers, details below:
Committee proposal: DeFi, lead by @OPUser
We will be working alongside the following reviewers: Dhannte, MinimalGravitas, ScaleWeb3.
We feel very comfortable with our team, as each and every one of them has had an important presence in the governance for Season 1 to have culminated with relative success. Also, we share the same values strongly aligned to Optimism itself.
As expected, we will move so that the proposals make sense and everything is in accordance with alignments, proposed goals and shared values, while prioritizing long-term, genuine growth and derisk of gaming incentives.
[DRAFT] S02 Committee Proposal: DeFi
Committee proposal: Tooling Governance Committee, lead by @krzkaczor
We will be working alongside the following reviewers: lefterisjp, cryptotesters, ceresstation.
Tooling and infrastructure is probably one of the most undervalued topics and does not necessarily directly impact the conscious interests of the end user, as it does in the DeFi category with the usual standard liquidity mining programs and other incentives.
We are proud to have been able to deliver the proposal on time with a framework that we believe is an excellent starting point, considering the potential variety of proposals applying to this category and that we are ready to address as a team.
[DRAFT] S02 Committee Proposal: Tooling Governance Committee
Our procedure in the current committees:
As we stated in our first post, currently this delegation is performed by Joxes (myself) as a leader alongside a team made up of spanish-speaking contributors with experience in DeFi and other topics. Some members have been enormously active as @Netrim @Defi_LATAM_axlvaz @NicoEsp and other committeed to this commitment, without this having to mean any type of obstacle, but on the contrary, rapid execution of any task, and preserving our original mission as a community for Optimism governance.
In the formal instances/aspects, I bear all responsibility as leader and representative of DeFi LATAM, delegate and sole owner of this account and ENS.
About our participation in two differents committees:
We have absolute confidence in carrying out our work in favor of OP collective and these conditions were accepted by the rest of our committee teams. If the foundation, delegates or community strongly believe that this represents a severe problem, we can reach a resolution. However, we are pleased to contribute to making both proposals possible within the established times, and looking forward to season 2 being successful in all aspects.