Hey @ScaleWeb3 thanks for the feedback and explanation!
We will be working on growing usage and taking another look at ask amount for the next round of proposals.
Glad to hear you had a positive experience with GYSR incentive mechanisms, and we agree it would be a great fit for Optimism! We think it is especially important to provide tooling for such a fast growing ecosystem.
And that’s a great suggestion, will reach out to connect with other projects launching incentive programs right now on Optimism.
We will revise our requested grant amount and break usage down to be much more granular in our next submission. And we did provide some feedback on that accountability thread! Thanks for all your work and thinking here.
Thank you for the tag and just a heads up, there will be no phase2, phase1 its an ongoing process until the fund is over, so i would suggest you to go though all the suggestion and amend the proposal so that you have ample amount of time before the next voting round
Project quality: ? - No PMF, low TVL Team quality: ? - Hard to asses, low activity on GitHub Amount requested: High OP distribution: ? - Some of ideas to spent OP are questionable…, mostly LM…
I am voting no on this proposal. I read the white paper. I think the team has put in serious effort in developing their product. In the end, I have a hard time seeing how the grant is more of a public good than a subsidy. I think the rewards-based platforms are incentivized (and disincentivized) well by market forces. While there may be derivative public benefit, I do not see the need for a grant as a catalyst. I would be interested in seeing if the team develops further products.
More generally, we also wanted to share our latest newsletter containing a brief recap of recent protocol developments (will have another to share soon)
Reaching out to let you know that we have updated the above proposal in preparation for the next voting round. We would greatly appreciate any thoughts or feedback.
