Week of October 7th, 2024
Recent Proposals
-
Rolling Mission Requests: Voting Cycle 28
-
Summary: The “Rolling Mission Requests: Voting Cycle 28” proposal seeks to advance the previously approved strategy focused on expanding application developers on the OP Mainnet. Under Intent 3A, this initiative sets a target to engage 9,500 active developers within the Superchain. The voting employs an approval ranking system where Mission Requests must secure a minimum of 51% of the quorum through ‘yes’ votes to qualify for budget allocation. Notably, one of the highlighted Mission Requests aims to boost the adoption of non-USD/EURO stablecoins, utilizing the remaining budget of Season 7. Participants are urged to vote affirmatively on favored Mission Requests, with a reminder that votes are irrevocable once cast. The proposal aligns with the strategic goal of broadening the developer community and optimizing resource allocation in future cycles.
-
Proposer: Optimism Foundation
-
Status: Voting in progress
-
Forum Highlights
-
[Mission Request] Increase Prevalence of Non-USD/EURO Stablecoins
In a recent mission request, Delegate Michael Vander Meiden, known as OPMichael, outlines a plan to enhance the liquidity of non-USD and non-EURO fiat-pegged stablecoins on the Optimism Mainnet. With a total grant of $15,000, this initiative targets projects aiming to develop or grow these stablecoins, crucial for real-world applications like ticketing and payments in countries outside the US and Europe. The mission seeks multiple applicants to address the need for local stablecoins in markets such as Mexico, Thailand, and South Africa. Progress will be tracked through milestones, total value locked (TVL), and activity metrics of these stablecoins, aiming to bolster their adoption and integration into financial infrastructures.
-
Retro Funding 6: Application Review Process
The Retroactive Public Goods Funding (Retro Funding) application review process for Optimism’s sixth round establishes a structured evaluation method for applicants seeking participation. It is conducted by a selected group of Citizens who commit to a minimum of 10 hours over a two-week period post-project signup. Reviewers are expected to be well-versed in OP governance, maintain communication with lead reviewers, adhere strictly to application rules, and declare any conflicts of interest. Reviewers are selected through opt-in and random sampling, culminating in teams that collaboratively assess applications. Applications undergo a multi-stage review, with potential for appeal if initially rejected. Strict rules are enforced to eliminate applications for falsehoods, hateful content, or other violations, ensuring integrity in the funding process.
-
Measuring the Concentration of Power in the Collective
The forum post introduces the Concentration of Power Index (CPI), a tailored version of the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index, designed to evaluate power concentration within the Optimism Collective. Sponsored by the Optimism Foundation, the research blends individual delegate voting power with the impact of governance entities like Houses, Councils, and Committees. The CPI aims to highlight power distribution and its potential risks, facilitating policy adjustments towards decentralization. The analysis reveals that the Citizens’ House wields the most influence, followed closely by the Token House. The CPI tracks the trend of decentralization over different governance rounds and seasons, showing a significant decline in power concentration, indicating successful decentralization efforts. The report also compares the CPI across various DAOs, illustrating Optimism’s balanced approach to governance and its commitment to equitable power distribution.
-
Announcing Super Contributor Cohort 0
The forum post announces the launch of Super Contributor Cohort 0 following the approval of their Mission Request. This six-week co-learning track is designed for Superchain contributors within the Optimism Collective, aiming to equip them with the necessary skills and insights to elevate their contributions. The cohort includes the Optimism Contributor Essentials MOOC, weekly meetings, various on-chain exercises, and a meetup in Bangkok. Interested individuals can access more information through provided links and are encouraged to share this opportunity with colleagues and friends involved in on-chain organizations.
-
Collective Feedback Commission Pilot Retrospective
In a recent forum post, the Foundation evaluated its six-month pilot of the Collective Feedback Commission (CFC), aimed at formalizing feedback processes within the community for improved governance. The pilot saw groups like Token House and Citizens’ House provide essential feedback on early design drafts and contributed ideas that exceeded initial success goals. Key learnings included the need for clear initial expectations, reducing context gaps for meaningful feedback, and ensuring feedback loops are closed with participants. Plans for the next iteration include enhancing collaboration, refining membership criteria, and hosting a kickoff to align goals and expectations. The ultimate aim is to decentralize governance design responsibilities, fostering a culture of high-value feedback and engagement. Launch of the next phase is anticipated in early November, emphasizing a more persistent structure with dedicated leadership and resources to manage the process effectively.
-
Cycle 28 Grants Preliminary Roundup
In the Cycle 28 Grants Preliminary Roundup, 61 applications were received, encompassing both Superchain and audit applications. Of these, 28 were declined either during the initial intake or the preliminary round, leaving 33 applications advancing to the final review. A standout initiative this cycle was the Auditor Whitelisting Initiative, successfully expanding the list of approved audit service providers to eleven. Applicants can access scores and feedback through their application portals, promoting transparency and aiding improvement. The preliminary cutoff was set at 30 points, while finalists, to be announced next Thursday, require a minimum of 40 points. Gratitude is extended to the Developer Advisory Board and Grants Council for their valuable contributions. A link to the finalists’ database is also provided for access.
-
govNerds Maintainers S6 feedback thread
In the Govnerds Maintainers Season 6 feedback thread, user Megalod commends the team for their dedication and highlights both achievements and areas for improvement. The post acknowledges the efforts in transparency regarding governance updates but notes occasional delays and lack of detail, suggesting enhanced communication. It praises community engagement initiatives but suggests boosting participation with new onboarding and educational techniques. The decision-making process is seen as inclusive yet occasionally dominated by certain voices, calling for broader representation. Concerns about slow implementation of decisions are raised, advocating for improved efficiency, while innovation receives acclaim with a recommendation for more educational resources to bridge knowledge gaps. Overall, the feedback remains optimistic about the progress and anticipates further growth in the next season.
-
Join us on October 8th for the next Optimism community call, where we’ll delve into Retrofunding rounds 5 and 6. The meeting will take place via Google Meet, and everyone is welcome to contribute ideas for the agenda. We’re excited to see you there and discuss the impact and future of retroactive public goods funding. Feel free to drop any suggestions for the discussion topics beforehand. Let’s make this call productive and engaging! See you soon — Michael.
-
Impact Metrics for Retro Funding 5
In the forum post titled “Impact Metrics for Retro Funding 5,” Open Source Observer discusses their support for the latest retro funding round by offering a suite of impact metrics tailored for OP Stack contributions. These metrics aim to provide human voters with valuable “data in the loop” to complement projects’ self-reported impact statements. The metrics are categorized into basic GitHub stats, contributor counts (including trusted contributors), and trust-weighted metrics, which use OpenRank algorithms to assess contributions across numerous repos. The post details the fields included in the analysis, such as contributor numbers and GitHub stars, and emphasizes the evolving nature of these metrics. It notes that while these metrics are helpful, they rely solely on public GitHub activity and should not replace thorough due diligence by voters. The complete source code and data are available for public scrutiny, inviting feedback and discussion on GitHub.
-
Cycle 28 Intent 3A Mission Request and Sponsorship
The forum post titled “Cycle 28 Intent 3A Mission Request and Sponsorship” calls for mission proposals to be considered by the Grants Council, with a remaining budget of 15,000 OP. Participants are instructed to follow specific steps: copying the provided template, creating a new forum post, tagging it appropriately, and indicating if they are seeking sponsorship. The post encourages engagement by accessing a linked template and requires users to share the link to their proposal in the forum thread.
-
Retro Funding 5: Bribery Policy
In the forum post titled “Retro Funding 5: Bribery Policy,” the discussion focuses on the anti-bribery policy for Round 5 of the Optimism protocol’s governance. Participants, known as Optimists, are urged to avoid self-dealing, with mechanisms in place to reduce these opportunities through incentive designs and voting. The policy outlines a reporting and enforcement process for tackling bribery, requiring three separate reports to validate allegations, followed by enforcement actions. These actions include disqualification from future rounds or removal from current funding opportunities, subject to Citizens’ House approval. Any enforcement proposal must be presented and is subject to veto within a week. The post emphasizes the evolving nature of governance decisions concerning bribery and self-dealing.
-
The forum post titled “Badgeholder Onchain Analysis” delves into the on-chain behavior of Badgeholders within the Superchain ecosystem, which encompasses networks like OP Mainnet, Base, Zora, and Mode. The analysis contrasts Badgeholders with Non-Badgeholders, revealing that while Badgeholders have a significant account age, their overall activity is lower. Badgeholders favor transactions on Ethereum and engage heavily in token transfers on a limited number of decentralized exchanges. A significant portion of them are also connected with Farcaster, suggesting high social engagement. The insights from this study aim to help the Optimism Collective enhance Badgeholder participation and community integration across the Superchain.
-
Zk Toolkit for ZK Application Developers: Mission updates
WakeUp Labs is developing a ZK Identity Toolkit for developers building on the Superchain, prioritizing self-sovereign identity and privacy through cutting-edge zero-knowledge (ZK) technology. This toolkit is designed for seamless integration with decentralized applications (dApps), enhancing security and user trust by enabling developers to incorporate ZK proofs effectively. The mission is to empower individuals with full control over their identities, ensuring privacy and security. WakeUp Labs will continue updating the community on their progress via this thread and encourages followers to stay connected through social media for further updates.
-
Cycle 28 Grants Council Audits implementation
Optimism Collective has launched a new audit mission request system approved by the Token House, simplifying the process for eligible auditors to apply for specific audits. This initiative allows auditors to simultaneously apply for whitelisting and audit jobs, eliminating the need for pre-approved budgets. Key to its operation are three steps: applying for the whitelist, submitting audit applications, and reaching out to whitelisted audit providers via the audit hub. This process aims to bolster the Optimism ecosystem by subsidizing smart contract audits for promising projects. The Grants Council and a subcommittee review the whitelisting applications using a five-question rubric focused on the applicant’s experience and transparency.
Upcoming Votes
1 Proposals live at the time of writing this report, no upcoming proposals detected