OPUser - Delegate Communication Thread

This is just an idea I like from GFX Labs delegate thread.

Going forward, I will using this thread to share my view and opinion on proposals and governance in general.

8 Likes

Should we allow Phase 0 Project to Submit a new funding Proposal in Phase 1.

1 Like

What’s your view on fund accountability.

1 Like

I think with RPGF round upon us and more and more project proposal coming towards us related to public goods, we should work on filtering the definition of public good.

What is public good to you

1 Like

GF Phase 1; Cycle 2 vote and some feedback.

Proposal A: Optimistic Railway - Yes
Proposal B: dForce - Yes
Proposal C: GYSR - No
Proposal D: Mean Finance - Yes
Proposal E: Raptor - No
Proposal F: Balancer & BeethovenX - Yes
Proposal G: Summa - No
Proposal H: WardenSwap - Yes
Proposal I: Pickle Finance - Yes
Proposal J: Ooki Protocol - No
Proposal K: Infinity Wallet - Yes
Proposal L: Beefy - No
Proposal M: 0xHabitat - No
Proposal N: Thales - No
Proposal O: ParaSwap - Yes
Proposal P: Rotki - Yes
Proposal Q: Candide - Yes

Few other suggestion(from Phase 1) that we need to improve on:-

  1. There should be exact date and time on when proposal will go live, not just the date but time too for example 12PM CET, GMT or any time zone will work. This time there was lot of confusion.

  2. Would be great if delegate(s) took some of their time and provide feedback before the proposal goes to voting, I have see that many project(s) are quite active on their proposal, seeking feedback and willing to update and amend their proposal depending the feedback from users/delegates.
    What’s the point of giving suggestion when proposal is live, the project team cant amend the suggestion even if they want to, jumping it at the last moment is not helping anyone.

  3. There should be at least 24hr cool down period before bringing proposals to voting, during this time the responsibility will be on project team to make sure that their proposal is adhering to all the requirement and is ready for voting, if they miss to do so, they will be accountable rather than OP Team or delegates.

  4. This one is for me but would like to mention, delegate should be precise in their word when providing their support to a proposal.

  5. We need some active participation from OP team on discord gov channel, during Phase 1, I had few queries related to couple of proposal, I did post them on discord gov general channel but did not got any response from team. Again, as a delegate, its my responsibility to make a judgement call but little help here and there could help me make a better decision.

  6. If project submitting a proposal is not willing to submit a report on their last phase spending sighting extra and unnecessary work, I expect that OP Team should provide us with such a report. This is again just for me, I am not asking other do the same or suggesting on making this a rule but I am willing to invest my time looking at those report so that
    a. I can make better decision on the basis of those report.
    b. I would like to make sure that funds are being used properly ie. accountability.

  7. This is to the team submitting the proposal focusing on LP and airdrop, on “why the users will stay once incentives are over”; these two are my favorite line
    a. users will come for incentive and stay for the product
    b. we believe our project has this and this to offer and users will stay because of this
    I request you to understand this, those using L2 as their main chain to do their transaction, we dont need someone to tell us about a unique and innovative project, its vice versa, we are looking for them. If I am using a platform just because of an incentive, I will use it as long as incentive exist but on the other hand I will continue to use if the platform is self-sustainable and rewarding me for using it, OP incentive are just a boost, if you need an extra incentive to sustain your project, you need to re-think your stagey. Again, my opinion, highly dependent on individual.

See you all in Phase 2. Cheers!

1 Like

Feedback is like a medicine

Feedback- When should we give feedback, I work in tadifi and would give an example from my experience, we have 3 month feedback cycle where we provide feedback to each other and of-course by nature feedback should be constructive and not destructive.

In Phase 1, we are providing our reasoning on why we are voting yes/no which is good to have and we should continue this.

I want to discuss the timing, from my experience, if I only give feedback at end of 3 months, I will see the improvement in next quarter but if I share it as I see a scope of improvement, I can see the changes in next days/week.

Similarly, can we work on giving the feedback at early stage so that the project team can improve their proposal before it goes for voting. Think from the project team side, they are active on the forum, spending their time, seeking input, feedback, answering users comment and most important willing to improve their proposal depending on the input. Now, if you only provide feedback at the end when they cant amend their proposal even if they want, what the point of that feedback. Feedback is like a medicine, it works best when given at right time. I feel sympathy with project team and I share their frustration.

2 Likes

Final Voting : Phase 1; Cycle 3

Final result for this phase.

Proposal A: Superfluid : YES
Proposal B: Kromatika : YES
Proposal C: Hundred Finance : YES
Proposal D: Biconomy : YES
Proposal E: Dope Wars : NO
Proposal F: Infinity Wallet : YES
Proposal G: Dexguru : NO
Proposal H: Overnight[.]fi : NO
Proposal I: Saddle Finance : NO

  1. With this Cycle 3 comes to an end and going forward, I would like to see more detailed plan towards token distribution and user retain especially towards project focusing on LP incentive.

  2. Other thing I would to share is focus on co-incentive, if your project is giving APY on providing liquidity to a pool is not a co-incentive but rather a feature of your project/product. What you are willing to offer from your side to match the token request is a co-incentive such as your project token, if your project does have a token our cant provide the co-incentive, mention it as such.

  3. And this is one quite important, if you disagree with any decision or comment, please explain your reasoning and ask open ended question.

  4. This one goes to OP Team, we should follow OP manual and rules mention there and should not consider any proposal if they does not have approval from a delegate with voting power mentioned in the OP Manual.
    If you are mentioning something in the manual, stick to it or just remove the line. I saw that they have mentioned that they will follow the rule going forward which is a good thing to see.

See you in Phase 1; Cycle 3.

Cheers!

PS: As usual, I am looking forwards towards your feedback and/or criticism on how to improve the gov and what can I do to support you more.

2 Likes

I wan to discuss project boosting their delegate power with governance fund

With this Season 1 comes to an end.
A: Rocket Pool - Yes
B: Boardroom - Yes
C: dHedge - Yes
D: xToken - No
E: Byte Mason Product Suite - Yes
F: GARD - No
G: Beefy - Yes

See you in season 2

Edit 1:- With recent development on Byte Mason, I have decide to change my vote from Yes to Abstain.