1. Presentation
We are an officially recognized Tooling Governance Committee, responsible for assessing proposals related to tooling and infrastructure (wallets, bridges etc.).
2- About the project
Ambire is an open-source smart wallet that has Optimism support since May 2022.
3- About the following
The proposal was published on October 25th asking for 425k OP tokens.
As a Tooling committee, the project was recently catalogued as “Tooling” in the Grant category, and so we’ve taken on the responsibility of issuing a recommendation.
4- About the proposal valuation
- Added value (good to bad): average. Ambire is an opensource and really interesting project. But the added value to optimism is small since the incentives are mostly to using Ambire in optimism.
- Impact or expected usage (high to low): medium. Ambire is free to use and all optimism users can try it. The proposal would probably increase Ambire usage in optimism but not sure if this will help Optimism itself in some way.
- Current Status [Development stage/Open Source?] (early to ready): ready. The wallet is ready and
- Expenditure plan and distribution (appropriate to inappropriate): reasonable. The incentivization distribution plan is reasonable though there is very strong sybil concerns.
- Amount requested (high to low): medium. The requested amount is reasonable compared to other projects but bordering on the high side. The fact that they are willing to start a governance proposal to introduce matching with their $WALLET token is favorable.
5. KPIs and impact tracking
It would probably make sense to have a dune dashboard or some other kind of way to track how many users bridged to Optimism to use Ambire and how many devs built on Ambire compatible dapps, how many users held $OP for the duration of the incentives program (and how many dumped right afterwards).
6- FINAL RECOMMENDATION: Abstain
The final recommendation comes from the fact, that as has been pointed out on the forum - there are many proposals approaching user incentivisation using OP rewards, but there is no common framework for user rewards structure across different projects. It would be unfair if the reward structure differed between projects, so we suggest delaying any further grants toward user incentivisation in wallets until such a framework is formed. After that, each wallet asking for a grant toward user incentivisation should follow this framework of rewards structure.
Furthermore, we recommend separating the work for integrating the wallet with specific dapps into another proposal, so that this aspect can be voted separately.
Once that’s done we would be more inclined to suggest a yes.