It is important to establish in the Operating Manual that only projects launched on Optimism can apply for governance funding.
In previous voting cycles there have been many projects that have applied for governance funding without being launched on Optimism, we focus on the fact that most delegates and Token House members do not have technical knowledge and judge projects based on the activity, value and impact on Optimism, these are things that delegates and anyone can check. But projects applying for governance funding without being launched on Optimism should only be approved and voted on for promises without information and data that can be verified on the Optimism network.
Projects that need pre-launch funding can apply for funding from the Partner Fund.
Because when applying for a grant from the Governance Fund the accountability is minimal or even non-existent.
When projects apply for a grant from the Partner Fund, the projects’ responsibility for the use of the grant is greater, and the Optimism Foundation does more in-depth research.
There have also been projects applying to the Governance Fund for project development, what responsibility do such projects have and how will Token House verify the use of the grant?.
If Token House has a strong desire to provide pre-launch funding then form a committee with exact requirements and criteria.
That way in the future it will lead to absurd situations and we will see projects applying to the Governance Fund for reserach grants)) Even though I am not against research grants and I am of the opinion that researching new ideas is more important than developing old ideas, but this kind of funding requires more accountability.
It is important that allocations from the Ecosystem Fund are as efficient as possible.