There are two other proposals quite similar to this one:
- [Review][GF Phase 1 Proposal] Optimism 🌈 Rainbow (already passed)
- [REVIEW][GF Phase 1 Proposal] Optimism 🤝 Tally Ho - #36 by FilterBySpam
What all three have in common is that they mean to incentivize wallet users to use Optimism (with the given wallet) and perform some special actions like swapping tokens or holding OP for a specific period of time.
However, all of them lack detailed plans on how they are supposed to distribute funds to the users. The Rainbow team mentioned that they are already working with some people from Optimism Foundation in order to come up with some incentive structure.
I believe that all wallets should have the same incentives structure or at least that their incentive structures should not be competitive - it wouldn’t make sense for Optimism to pay more for swapping tokens in one wallet than in another wallet (of course each wallet is free to additionally reward users for those actions apart from OP rewards). Moreover, Rainbow proposal introduces KPI milestone that needs to be achieved before releasing additional funds (only 30% of the requested amount is released upfront), I believe that the other proposals should also include similar KPI requirements. Given that I believe that a common incentive structure should be obtained before proceeding further with such proposals.
Furthermore, both TallyHo and Ambire proposals include using ~25% of the allocated funds in order to incentivize dApp developers to integrate with their wallets. I believe this part of the proposal should be excluded to a separate one so that community would be able to decide if OP should directly fund this (as this benefits more the wallet itself and not OP ecosystem) and those grants if separated would be substantial by themselves (~100k OP). To be clear - I’m not against OP funding this, just would like to see it separated from the grants to incentivize using Optimism with the given wallet (also to be able to compare those grants as apples to apples).
Moreover, it might be worth considering making sure that OP is not rewarding the same wallet for using Optimism across different wallets. Right now it feels like overkill to me, but from OP perspective it’s quite possible that a single user will farm OP rewards for the same Optimism activity in every wallet with an incentive structure (yet I’m not sure if that’s necessarily bad).
To summarise, what I propose would be to:
- Separate wallet integration into separate proposals.
- Streamline the work on incentive structure between Rainbow, Tally Ho, and Ambire to have a common incentive schema between wallets (or at least make sure that common parts between wallets are not competitive).
- Wait before proceeding with any additional grants related to incentivizing using Optimism in wallets until the common incentive structure is obtained.
Of course, in order for this plan to work it would be necessary to effectively work on the common incentive structure, but each of the projects needs to figure it out before implementing anything anyway, so it seems like a good milestone whatsoever.
I’ve posted a similar comment in the other mentioned thread.