My personal opinion here is that getting more protocols and builders invested and engaged in governance is unquestionably a good thing. If governance deems a protocol worthy of a grant, then I believe they should deem them worthy of some sort of formal voice in governance.
This could actually be done very simply by saying that every protocol that receives a grant can use a flat amount (say 200,000 OP) to self-delegate as those tokens are waiting to be used for their intended purpose. This seems far better than having them just sit passively in wallets and would hopefully help protocols understand the value of acquiring OP tokens for this purpose.
We have to remember that current token distribution was largely driven by the gifting of tokens via airdrop and the nature of delegation UI. It is right now fairly concentrated amongst a small group of people who have largely not had to go out and acquire it themselves. Now is the time to grow the governance pie and further decentralize, not create barriers to participation.
But if my opinion is in the minority, I agree that we should make it clear to protocols that proposals for self-delegation only increases the likelihood they’ll be rejected by the committees. If they want a voice in governance they’ll either need to purchase it or spend time campaigning for it. I think this is sub-optimal, but lack of clarity or consistency here would be much worse.