Reading through the changes now, left a few tiny nits on the PR. More substantive comments below 
- Small request about this, potentially for a future season:
For a proposal to proceed to Week 3 (voting), two delegates with >0.5% of the current votable token supply must give explicit approval on the discussion thread. Delegates may signal this approval by pasting the comment on the proposal discussion thread: ”I am an Optimism delegate [link to your delegate commitment] with sufficient voting power and I believe this proposal is ready to move to a vote."
It would be nice to have easy to link cards showing delegates’ voting power rather than the thread. The Optimism website already has this info here. I think all that’s missing would be to make individual delegate cards linkable.
- Re: “The total votable OP supply will be determined based on a reasonable estimate provided by the Optimism Foundation prior to each Voting Cycle.”
It would be nice if there was somewhere (even if just a .md file or thread here) keeping track of the votable OP supply per Voting Cycle
-
Re: the Approval Thresholds, it’s a bit odd to me that “Protocol Upgrade” doesn’t have the highest threshold, similar to “Inflation Adjustment” (which can be thought of as a protocol upgrade in a way) or “Director Removal”.
-
Re: this
- If it is not, the Foundation may remove the proposal for resubmission or cause the proposal to be implemented with certain guardrails, in its discretion, and coupled with an explanation to the Collective as to why the proposal was rejected or limited.
It would be nice if the OF could commit to when possible/on a best-effort basis/assuming no legal risks/etc. proactively giving this feedback to proposal authors and the community more broadly so that potential solutions/tweaks may be considered during the Voting Cycle.