It is part of the objective of our proposal XD. With what we learned in phases 0 and 1, improve the following ones. I certainly share your opinion regarding this type of Spam comments.
Thank you for your initiative here. I am fully supportive of taking a pause before the next cycle to reconsider how we can improve the governance process and make it more efficient.
So if I understand this correctly we are planning to pause governance fund phase 1 to allow anyone to propose changes to the way we process applications?
Isn’t it highly likely this would create a too-many-chefs-in-the-kitchen situation where we’ll end up debating back and forth for weeks on how to proceed, or am I missing something?
I think we should at least pause it in between cycles to focus on those projects who got in and give good feedback aligned with Optimism’s vision. While proposals are active for 6 days on Snapchat we stop new proposals to be posted maybe?
At this rate, I’m nearly keeping it up and made my own filters on what to say yes and what to say no.
I got this from Exosphere in the discord and made it my own rule
OK usage : *
Protocol usage incentives
Grants and other forms of 3rd party developer incentives
Small (<10%) retroactive allocations (early adopters, etc)
Unacceptable usage :
Paying for full project development. It’s good to support projects with already some skin In the game but supporting Ideas with nothing to show is a nono for me.
I am not in favor of this, we should focus on more agile approach, start and stop will add extra work and make us slow, I would rather suggest creating a thread under idea/suggestion section, discuss on that, once approved, active it. This obliviously needs more thought.
- sound good
- this one also make sense
Vote in Snapshot the [READY] proposals, in this case the voting time should be much shorter, we believe that with 1 week to vote these proposals is fine.
I see why you are focusing on 1 week but my side, I would like to change this to 2 week. You see, for my fiat mining job, I travel a lot and if the voting duration is just 1 week there are chances that I might miss the vote.
Overall, I would like to discuss this more but I dont like start/stop approach.
In the proposals we clarified with the number of days may change, we only made a suggestion.
It should be noted that this is only an initiative.
Currently the process is a bit messy, if we observe there are still projects that are applying to phase 1, it is a mess that in our opinion makes the work less efficient. Also the protocols receive feedback in the forum and in the discord we believe that we should maintain a single channel of communication. The idea of the pause is only to order and have a clear communication between all participants whether they are proponents, delegates or participants.
The pause should be short so we propose short times. We believe that the OP of the governance fund should be well allocated, which in the current disorder makes it difficult to maintain good criteria.
Good idea to improve the ecosystem
Yes please, let’s keep feedback here. It’s almost impossible to follow feedback on discord unless you are tagged or you have a channel for each proposal. A macro debate on how this works is good for discord but specific feedback should be kept in here.
I’m generally in favour of this idea, I think something needs to change to get the best our of our decision making process as at the moment it does just feel a bit too rushed. I still haven’t finished evaluating and voting on all of the Phase 1 proposals, and by the time I do there will likely be very little time for discussion/comment on the next round’s proposals before they are locked into the next voting cycle.
A brief pause in the cycle to get caught up, would meant that by the time the next batch of proposals go to vote most delegates have already had a good look at the protocols and had time to discuss thoughts with the proposers etc. Then we could quickly vote and use the time while phase 2 is on Snapshot to focus on the phase 3 proposals, so when they come to vote we are already familiar with them and can be reading though phase 4 etc etc.
Looking back, this could have been how it was working from the start, and for some delegates I’m sure this is how they are operating, but I don’t think I’m the only one working about 1/2 a cycle behind. I don’t know if anything about the overall process would need to be changed to be honest, in my opinion just a reset to get us all to the same point, so we have done some digging into the next phase’s proposals before they go live, would probably be enough, now that we can all see how the cycles flow.
No, just a simple idea to implement as detailed in the example. Ideas that need to be discussed should have another process. Our idea is to come up with a maximum of 5 tips that are easy to implement and do not require radical change.
Now I understood the reason for pause, I do agree with you on this one. Submitting proposal in Phase 1 does not make sense anymore, OP team should give them guidance to either change the pending/draft proposal to change them as Phase 2 or put them into different bucket.
Also, yet to putting feedback at once place.
Hello all, thanks for reply this thread and @Defi_LATAM_axlvaz by reply with comments about our vision.
Here my response about some of your feedbacks
Yes we’re thinking about it (risk of infinite loops) but I believe we’re in a early stage to improve quickly various aspects and we as delegates have had enough coincidence. By example the objective of Phase 1 must be preserved, and the Optimism Foundation can help moderate the discussions quickly.
Just a little clarification, take into account that there is no Phase 2/3/4, Phase 1 will be extended until the funds are exhausted (196,128,233 OP) according to its docs. That’s why we propose to anticipate in order to smoothly reorganize different points sooner rather than later. I expect that the Optimism Foundation will also propose some changes but surely if we start this discussion early we can provide a really positive improvement by establishing a formal timeframe for it first.
Also, good to know that the team received our feedback and implemented an improvement in the Phase 1 templates (@bobby confirmation here) proposed by DeFi LATAM in this post; surely we can do more positive things.
IMO, the focus should be on decentralizing Optimism first, starting with Bedrock, then contracts, followed by sequencer. It’s pragmatic to streamline ecosystem funding while the platform is centralized and till we’re closer to economic sustainability. Bit of a tangent, but those are my personal priorities.
Edit: agree with this, in fact, we can move to discuss those threads focused on this aspect and share good ideas, personally I will review later, very interested on it (don’t know how I missed it). In the meantime, we believe that if we set a time frame to improve phase 1, it will also be a long-term benefit.
Contract hyperlink is linked to sequencer page, here is direct link to his contracts page
The volume of proposals is high but manageable. But i like the idea of building more structure/process incrementally to a somewhat rudderless process.
Does anyone know what % of the total token allocation for Phase 0/1 has already been distributed? If the % distributed is low then perhaps the process should throttled not stopped altogether.
I believe there will be dashboard available to us soon where we can find all these information.
is this a defined thing that someone has taken ownership of?
I assume your statement is for me @jackanorak
not sure if someone has take ownership or not, but what I know is that this was discussed during phase 0 from team side. We will get a dashboard where we can find all gov related information and the dashboard will improve with time and feedback.
Hello delegates and community, thank you for your feedbacks. We’re taking note of all the ideas expressed here and there regarding the improvement of Phase 1 and governance process and bringing it to the Reflection Period indicated by the Optimism Foundation in this update. I recommend everyone to participate early in this new approach and possible series of changes for Season #2.