Proposal to stop Phase 0 Projects to submit new proposal in Phase 1

Yes, I agree with you. Common sentiment is, there should not be a rule as such, leave it to delegates and their judgement, and it would help if team is providing data supporting their second proposal.

Will update the thread in few days with all the input, keeping it open if anyone else want to share their opinion.

1 Like

Hello @OPUser thanks for bringing this point up for discussion. We believe that it is tremendously important to take these situations into account and systematically point them out. we don’t believe in simply restricting Phase 0 projects or new projects listing different proposals in short time frames. How about adding an additional requirement (mandatory) in the Phase 1 templates to ensure that projects provide information on the use of funds received recently approved by OP governance?

https://gov.optimism.io/t/governance-fund-phase-1-how-to-create-a-proposal/216

-Optimism alignment (up to 200 word explanation):
-Proposal for token distribution (under 1000 words):
- If the project received OP funds before, detail milestones and current status of its distribution (under 500 words):

With this we can optimistically ensure that the delegates can judge and appeal said results for better criteria for the discussion of proposals and correct follow-up.

5 Likes

I agree, this might just work fine.

2 Likes

A very reasonable amendment and would also make a useful reference for projects who plan to apply for funding incrementally based on milestones/deliverables.

2 Likes