@ScaleWeb3 I am reading your replies all over the forum and I am trying to understand how you evaluate projects since it looks like you don’t base your replies on the project and show little research on projects.
It looks like you look at what sector the project is in and based your opinion on that rather then the project its self.
IW proposal from what I can see if funding developers to build on OP similar to ParaSwap, so two similar cases yet one you say distribution BAD and other its GOOD.
As also shown on WardenSwap your decisions seem to be biased based on what you have used as you know those platforms and little research on the platforms you haven’t used. Your replies on a couple of projects show clear lack of knowledge or minimum research which is not good as a delegate.
infinity wallet i installed a few days ago after it was recommended it looks unique and will be moving over some crypto to try it out
At this point, we have to assume you’re trolling but we will give one more answer to show that we have best interests for the Optimism ecosystem, token holders and ecosystem apps.
The proposals differ significantly in quality and value for the Op ecosystem:
Paraswap is a top 3 DEX Aggregator. Infinity Wallet is not a top 10 Wallet.
Paraswap shows high long-term alignment with Optimism (Permanent liquidity, etc.). IW not to the same degree.
IW uses 55% of funds for low-value airdrop & internal integrations. Paraswap incentivizes with 65% others to also build on Optimism, integrate Paraswap Optimism integrations.
Paraswap:
IW:
We appreciate your support, and have given some feedback on your threads shared.
@matacen We appreciate your support, but could you take the conversation to a separate thread to keep things here on topic. Thanks
Thank you for sharing your feedback @scaleweb3
While market share is important (of which we are a top 10 desktop wallet, and the first non-browser extension Web3 desktop wallet), I would ask you to also consider market innovation. Access to Optimism and DApps on desktop is currently restrained to unintuitive browser extension wallets. We look to change that by integrating Optimism into the Infinity Wallet to provide an enhanced Web3 experience, enabling access for all users regardless of their technical ability.
Our proposal is focused around both short, and sustainable long term adoption of Optimism.
In the short term:
In addition to the upcoming initial Optimism support within Infinity Wallet, we look to introduce Optimism to our users through various airdrops/events. We see this as a great potential opportunity to bring new users to Optimism, which should have a low overlap with other Optimism airdrops since our users did not previously have access to Optimism within the Infinity Wallet. Additionally, due to being a multi chain wallet, it could attract users that may have never looked into or been incentivized to try Optimism before. From Web3 uninitiated Bitcoin holders, to Web3 veterans actively using other chain’s DApps in the wallet.
In regard to potential negative consequences you mention, to be able to sell the airdropped OP tokens would require Optimistic Ethereum as gas. Bridging ETH to and from Optimism could consume most or all of any potential profit from the small airdropped amount, and would currently require some research on how to acquire it (Although we do look to make onboarding ETH to Optimism for gas much easier from within the wallet in the future). Once a user has onboarded to Optimism, we believe it would be much more likely that they would stick around to see the benefits on offer (especially as we hope to provide them with a rich selection of Optimism DApps to discover and connect with as part of this proposal).
In the long term:
Long term is the main focus of the proposal. To attract further DApp development on Optimism, and to support them as part of a rich selection of Optimism DApps for users to easily discover and use, from within a user focused all-in-one platform.
We see this as sustainable long after the incentives have been distributed, as we look to create real value. Laying the foundation for user focused DApp usage on Optimism. With a large proportion of any DApps deployed expected to remain on Optimism indefinitely.
Regarding alignment, as a multi-chain wallet ecosystem with a strong focus on ease of Web3 adoption, we are absolutely aligned to support Optimism and leverage its benefits for the years to come. With the more DApps and developers we support on Optimism, the more features and services that support Optimism, the more opportunities it can bring to the overall ecosystem, leading to lasting long term adoption.
Appreciate your responsiveness and input which indeed helps to better understand your proposal.
I hope to see your support for Optimism - no matter the outcome of the vote. And, If you aren’t successful this time, we would be happy to see another proposal with a slightly higher focus on user onboarding to Optimism, co-incentives and a bit more detail, i.e. a more specific breakdown of use and distribution of funds, for example (as you briefly touched on) incentivizing users to bridge to Op and provide long-term liquidity to key trading pairs through the Infinity Wallet, or incentivizing the use of unique Op apps such as DCAing into tokens by subsidizing the costs (ofc while avoiding that users game the incentives/system).
Overall, as stated before, we are not very supportive of funding internal development of ventures. Also, we tend to be sceptic of metrics that we can not doublecheck ourselves but we’re very much looking forward to your Optimism support and to specific Op adoption/growth KPIs - if you can share them with us.
I have heard of Infinity wallet before and actually meaning to give it a try. No better time then now 
I’m voting Yes mostly on the strength of funds being used directly to onboard developers and users to Optimism. In future, I’d like to see more rollup-centric features on the wallet.
We have voted yes and look forward to seeing Infinity Wallet integrating Optimism into their wallets. Even though the wallet market is crowded, we believe that users should have a variety of options to choose from. 20% seems a tad too high for marketing especially if it is mainly airdropped, so we would prefer to see more activity-based campaigns to encourage adoption.
Thank you @polynya, we appreciate your support and feedback.
Appreciate your support and feedback @Bobbay_StableLab. Regarding the marketing proportion, we had actually updated this to 15% previously as suggested by @Cryptoz before the vote began.
I had voted Yes.Also i had used the wallet.
Hello,
I will be voting NO on this proposal.
Pros
What I like is that infinity wallet is a desktop only wallet. People who know me and my work know how much I appreciate local apps and dislike the browser-based webapps that have become the standard laely.
Interesting UI. I downloaded and tried the wallet before making a decision.
Cons
The main reason I vote NO is that this is a closed source product. I tried to find the source code of the product and could not find any references to opensource or anything in Github. I may be mistaken here, so please correct me if I am wrong but it seems this is a closed source product.
Then the ask amount is big. half a million OP tokens at the current price is $262,000.
This is going to be split between marketing and development of a closed source product which I think is really not what should be in the scope of these funding rounds.
Hello @lefterisjp
Thank you for taking the time to try out the Infinity Wallet, we hope you will enjoy using it with the upcoming Optimism support.
From your comment on the funds usage though, it does seem you have misread the proposed OP distribution.
The focus of this proposal is the direct expansion of the Optimism ecosystem and not development of the Infinity Wallet, of which we are actually integrating Optimism support for free outside of this proposal. The main recipient of the funds would be DApp developers that deploy on Optimism. Which we propose to further boost the proliferation of Optimism DApps by waiving our integration fee for integrating them into the Infinity Wallet. Additionally the marketing/airdrop portion is primarily for additional Optimism awareness, helping to introduce the Optimism ecosystem to our 150,000+ users.
Thanks
I think @lefterisjp knows that since your proposal is clear, I dont think he cares since he is actually doing something similar to you with portfolio management. This is why he would of voted NO as he is biased, which he should of voted abstain or yes like others did in these situations. Also his excuse for voting NO clearly means he didn’t read your proposal xD
I dont think this current delegation model will work as some delegators seem to much focused on their own interests rather then the interest of the OP ecosystem and seem misaligned with the OP mission
you should not make assumptions like this. My own proposal has nothing to do with infinity wallet as rotki is not a wallet and as such there is no conflict of interest.
You can disagree with my view on the infinity wallet proposal that’s fine. But be careful with unfounded accusations.
I’ll vote NO 
- beacuse it’s closed source and thus a custodial wallet. I would personally never use such software.
Project quality: Mid - Wallets for cross-chain world seem to be important but the fact that this wallet is closed source is a huge red flag.
Team quality: ? hard to assess
Amount requested: High
OP distribution: So, so - mostly to development costs