[READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Summa

Project Name: Summa (by Tracy & Associates Accounting)

Author Name: @Axel_T (Axel Tracy, https://www.linkedin.com/in/axeltracy/)

While Summa is a new organization, here are a few locations to facilitate research:

Website: https://tracyassociates.com.au (Current business website)
Twitter: https://twitter.com/TracyAssociates (Current business Twitter)
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/tracyassociates/ (Current business Instagram)
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/accofina (Older, but still active, business YouTube Channel)
Github: https://github.com/axel-t81 (Personal GitHub)

Number of OP tokens requested: 2,000,000 (think permanence, not just the next 12-month runway or a payoff for an initial build)

L2 Recipient Address: 0xa22662B3Cdd67B6f8aEB13755F180723508190b0

Relevant Usage Metrics:

  • N/A, new project. Although the key concepts of the project have been percolating in my mind and conversations for a good few years now.
  • 500+ Email List subscribers and 6,600+ YouTube Channel subscribers from current, other ventures.
  • Associate of the Institute of Public Accountants (AIPA AFA), Member of the Australian Bookkeepers Association, Certified Xero Advisor and Certified Quickbooks Online (Advanced) ProAdvisor. Registered BAS Agent. BBus (UTS) and GradCertFinPlan (Kaplan).

Optimism alignment (up to 200 word explanation):


A professional bookkeeper & qualified accountant wants to introduce and embed Optimism to the accounting industry, its clients, professional associations, and software providers …and change the world for the better in the process!

Key Theme:

Accounting data (in accounting systems) and accounting information (via financial reports and statements) are a critical public good for the private sector. They help businesses, investors and other stakeholders make key financial and life decisions. To date, the accounting industry has been underserved by the crypto space (outside of taxation advice and corporate consultancy services). We need a professional accountants to introduce the mainstream industry to the benefits of this technology, while breaking down entrenched power and generational gatekeepers. This can be done via Ethereum and Optimism.

Initial Product Concepts:

a) Community currency for the industry
b) Crypto payroll apps for accounting software stack
c) Crypto bill and invoice payments services within accounting software stack
d) B2B credit checking platform using Ethereum blockchain
e) Financial statements on Ethereum blockchain for transparency
f) Taxation savings automation for small businesses


I genuinely think the accounting sector is a perfect fit & ripe for crypto & Optimism, and will eventually be as impactful as DeFi is to financial services.

Proposal for token distribution (under 1000 words):

>>> How will the OP tokens be distributed?

  1. Accounting community currency, i.e. opt-in incentives for accountants, professional associations and software providers (25%)
  2. External app developer partners, i.e. akin to an accounting-focussed Ecosystem fund (20%)
  3. Summa Management and Team, i.e. core contributors, structure & team building, and operations (20%)
  4. Summa Treasury, i.e. wealth fund to shield Summa (20%)
  5. Future External Investors and Capital Raising Activities (15%)

>>> How will this distribution incentivize usage and liquidity on Optimism?


Considering we are trying to influence mainstream society at large and drive their adoption, Summa will adhere to all applicable regulations. To attract the masses we need to make adoption as reassuring as possible. As a regulated bookkeeper and qualified accountant running a compliant firm in a highly regulated industry, and having founded other successful companies, I am confident that applicable regulation will be adhered to by Summa. A compliant organisation, indistinguible from any other business, will incentivise usage in the mainstream population (our targets) and not only appeal to crypto insiders.

Community currency allocation (1), i.e. Initial Product Concept (a):

Taking on board the structure & timing of allocations (see other sections), driving optimal outcomes should be locked in. The community currency is for accounting firms, professional associations and software providers. That is, those allocated the community currency at no cost, will be inherently incentivised to see OP flourish. A zero cost, liquid asset with growth potential will be enough of an incentive over time, even as allocations halve. They will be driven to give their OP utility, and create its value, via unique offers for those who wish to transact in OP, and will also be incentivised to communicate about OP.

External partners and Summa team allocations (2 and 3), via the Initial Product Concepts (b - f):

b) Regulated payroll services and/or custom payroll software that both distributes wages in cryptocurrency and integrates with major payroll software packages. This can incentivise the use of OP by making the availability of the product limited to OP holders/stakers or SaaS payments in OP.

c) Pay bills or collect invoice payments with crypto inside the Xero and QuickBooks Online app ecosystems: OP usage and liquidity can be incentivised by making OP the featured currency within the payment platform. It can be featured by design or by limiting other competing altcoins available.

d) B2B Credit checking via public blockchain records and smart contracts. That is, have payment terms and timeframes (both within accounting software) fire events on Ethereum that can then be trawled or collated by our software/external apps: OP incentivised by making OP the required payment medium, via transaction fees, to write data.

e) Financial statements of public companies and significant entities (or any business wanting transparency) being recorded on the Ethereum Blockchain, all translated into a universal currency: OP. These records would be a public good available to anyone to use or build upon: OP is incentivised by making it the universal currency of all financial statements, i.e. the common currency all global financial statements are translated into.

f) Taxation savings automation for small businesses. Businesses who collect sales tax could use an intermediary token as a payment mechanism that has smart contract logic to segregate business funds and amounts to be relayed onto taxation agencies. OP can be incentivised as it could be the only currency to offer an on & off ramp to the intermediary token.

Summa Team (i.e. business operations), Treasury and Capital Raising allocations (3, 4 and 5):

This is all about the longevity of the Summa organisation. Decent levels of funds for multi-year, many market cycle operations are required, and capacity to secure investment within the mainstream business community. Finally, only Treasury fund returns will be utilised, and ultimately the principal shields Summa.

>>> Why will the incentivized users and liquidity remain after incentives dry up?

  • Those allocated the community currency will have the same incentives as they did before incentives dry up (or diminish). They will already have their allocation, they will already be emotionally/financially invested in OP based on past transactions and current holdings (See earlier section about community currency incentives).
  • The Summa team will be fairly and compliantly paid in mainstream fiat. Any direct OP payments will supplement their standard remuneration. Thus, they will see their OP as an asset to hold, rather than to liquidate for daily needs.
  • Any external investors will be vetted to ensure that any allocations of OP will not simply be liquidated. Ideally lock up will be included in shareholders agreements.
  • Summa management and external app partners will fundamentally #StayOptimistic. There will be inherent reasons why we commit our money, time and lives to working with the Collective.

>>> Over what period of time will the tokens be distributed?

  1. Accounting community currency : 10-years, with a halving of allocations every quarter (i.e. similar to Bitcoin miners’ incentive).
  2. External app partners: Minimum 5-years
  3. Summa team: Minimum 5-years
  4. Summa treasury: No lockup period, but will be managed sensibly. This fund will be a diversified crypto and fiat based portfolio, i.e. minimise risk by decoupling.
  5. Future capital raising: Minimum 2-years.

>>> How much will your project match in co-incentives?

The project is new and has zero funds.

But from personally, I’ll contribute OP, ETH, BTC and BNB equivalent to AUD $25,000.

Depending on your own perspective this may or may not sound like much, but from my own current financial position this is a significant personal commitment to this project.

PROPOSAL UPDATE (2022-06-17):

  1. Edits above to meet word count limit.
  2. This addition: Based on the feedback of a fellow Proposal (Raptor), Summa will buy back Optimism Tokens on the open market at each end of quarter (EOQ) using 5% of all revenue from the Payroll & Payment apps. We will also verifiably burn these OP tokens at EOQ and report these activities in a Gitbook. Like Raptor, burning OP Tokens will reduce circulating supply increasing its value.

Hi there, this is Axel the project proposer here.

I just want to say that while the above proposal was written to fit the outlined template and remain within word limits, I’m here to answer any questions you may have (in a more open, one-to-one, and fluid discussion). Also, this is still a Draft Proposal, so I’m ready to take on feedback and potentially incorporate any suggested improvements.

So please, jump in and say ‘Hi’ :slightly_smiling_face:

Kind regards,

Hi Axel, many thanks for proposal above. To clarify the project’s scope, could you please explain: are you building a dapp / protocol on OP that will onboard accountants and help them to perform the tasks above, or is it more of a marketing approach to show them what Crypto is / does? Thanks


Hi @Robor2b102

Initial Product Concept (a): Marketing/onboarding approach.
Initial Product Concept (b) and (c): Centralised app, but does interact with Optimism Network.
Initial Product Concept (d), (e) and (f): True DApps and the blue sky ideas for Optimism and Ethereum.

Firstly, thanks for your question, it’s a good one too. It’s a good question, because the above proposal is a grouping of ideas I’ve had for a few years involving crypto and the accounting industry. That is, this grouping means that I have both, DApp concepts, and an approach to use OP as a marketing (and ultimately onboarding) technique for the industry.

To go into more detail…

1) The community currency using OP is an onboarding/marketing (just let me call it onboarding?) approach. The idea here is that so few accountants know how the technology works outside of what they see on mainstream media or read in a Koinly report (if they even know what Koinly is). They may know how crypto impacts a tax return, but they’ve never held it themselves let alone been exposed to Web3. So the OP acts an incentive to get industry participants to jump through a few hoops to access their free OP rewards. First they’ll have to opt-in, and then they’ll have to be able to negotiate how to access and use their OP, etc. You only get the gold, if you learn how to use the pick & shovel. The key idea here is is that we can nudge or encourage a very wide group of professionals to learn the basics of OP, Layer 2 tech and Ethereum. And these aren’t just professionals, they can be very influential professionals as trusted financial and advice partners of individuals and businesses who use their service (often high net worth individuals and their businesses). So if the accountants become comfortable with the tech, they will feel more comfortable advising their clients about it. My assumption is that 85%+ of practising accountants could only name BTC as an example of a cryptocurrency, or possibly BTC and ETH. My goal is that we make OP the third name/example in their memory banks as they discuss crypto with their colleagues and clients, or indeed that OP is known as ‘the cryptocurrency that accountants use’. Okay, there’s more to this, and I could talk about it more, but there isn’t the time in one reply. Ask for more detail if you want?

2) As for “Initial Product Concepts” (b) and (c), the payroll and payments software. These aren’t really DApps, but instead they are centralised apps that reside within the accounting software stack ecosystem …BUT they will interact with the Optimism Network to carry out their functionality. That is, you’ll find that most small businesses and accounting firms don’t just use one piece of “accounting software”. Instead they use an accounting software stack. So they may start with Xero or Intuit Quickbooks Online (QBO) and then they’ll have a number of other apps that integrate with the core accounting data inside Xero/QBO/etc. For example, you may use Dear software for your inventory management and connect that to Xero or QBO, or you may use Stripe software for invoice payments and again, connect that to your Xero or QBO. Some of these add-ons are small apps from specialist app developers, and some add-ons like PayPal are giant business that use the accounting software packages to tap into the global small business market. Yep? So for ‘Initial Product Concept’ (b) and (c) I want to build these types of apps (1) for payroll and (2) for billing & invoice payments and have them inside the Xero App Store and QBO App Store. But the key idea here is that these app functions will interact with the Optimism Network. So they’re not completely DApps, and instead reside as Xero and QBO add-ons, but they will interact with Optimism to carry out payroll functions (i.e. pay staff in OP and other bridged tokens) and for payment services (i.e. send an invoice from inside Xero/QBO and the invoice will have a ‘Pay by Crypto/OP’ option where receiving business can pay these invoices in OP or other bridged tokens). EDIT (I just re-read your question): While this software will be for any business, you’ll find that most people who actually work with this software are indeed the bookkeepers and accountants, and thus it can onboard them to Optimism.

3) As for “Initial Product Concepts” (d), (e), and (f), these ARE the true DApps. These are the long-term, blue sky ideas. This is less about building new accounting apps or onboarding accountants, and more about creating platforms that Summa and I end up having very little to do with (i.e. they’ll operate on their own with a global community). Full transparency, full honesty: I’m a bookkeeper & accountant, and not a bleeding edge Web3 developer. So how these final ideas turn from concept, to build, to self-sufficiency, is something that hasn’t been nailed down yet or at least can’t be nailed down by me alone. But over time I think they are real-world applications of blockchain technology. Optimism allows us to interact with Ethereum at low cost, and I think Ethereum is the best blockchain for these ideas. If you’d like I can describe each of the concepts in more detail, but the overarching idea across all 3 of the concepts is that we can somehow link the data in accounting software, or batch payment files from accounting software, or simply public financial reports and push it (or small elements of it) onto the Ethereum blockchain. And if Ethereum really does become the world’s programmable blockchain that stores particular data forever and is immutable, then we might be able to get Ethereum to accept particular types of accounting-specific data (cheaply via Optimism) such as financial statements (like Ethereum recording XBRL data) or merely (late) payment events/timing. And from this pool of accounting-specific data points, some pretty groundbreaking DApps and use cases can be built from it. EDIT (I just re-read your question): While these DApp will be for anyone at all, you’ll find that most people who are interested in financial statements, credit checks and taxation payments do indeed have an accounting background, and thus it can again onboard them to Optimism.

In conclusion:

  • You can see via both this reply and my original draft, a whole bunch of things are crammed together.
  • I’d like to build or implement all of them, but you can probably see that while the vision is larger as the numbered points in this reply increment, the complexity also increases from (1), to (2), and then again to the highest complexity at (3).
  • But this is still a draft, and I’m still a team of 1(!) without great deal of colleagues in the crypto space, so I’m definitely open to suggestions, tips and guidance on how to approach this elephant meal I called the Initial Product Concepts listed in my proposal.
  • So please, feel free to make comments or suggestions, or provide advice if you think I’m doing things wrong.

Thanks for your time, and thanks again for your question. It was great to get Q1 :slight_smile:

Kind regards,

1 Like

Does anyone else have any opinions on how this Draft could be improved?
Summa is still very new and a work in progress, so getting early advice on how to shape this project is very beneficial, and can ensure the draft is up to standard prior to becoming Ready on the 22nd June.

Cheers, and hope to hear from you.

I strongly prefer projects to make multiple proposals over time rather than hand you 2M OP and hope for the best. This is a brand new totally unproven project that you’re asking us to basically fund for you. I’d recommend reducing the ask to 100k OP but I’ll most likely still vote against even at that price point.


adding my comment from discord:-

  1. what are you trying to build here? an app?
  2. who is your end users? and how that will add value to OP ecosystem?
  3. Number of token request is huge, why do you need such funding ?
  4. do you need all the funding at once? Will it be a better option to ask for small funding in this round, build something to show us and submit a new proposal again, in next phase

again, from my side, I want understand how you are planning to bring users to OP Ecosystem.

Hi @OPUser

As I said in discord, thanks for your input. I really appreciate you trying to understand more about what I’m proposing. There’s no such thing a bad question, right?

To answer your Q1 I will refer you to my Reply to Robor2b102’s own question above. I wrote both a TLDR version and a Full Response version to questions that are similar to your Q1.

To answer your Q2 I will again refer you to both my Draft Proposal and my Reply to Robor2b102. If you need any clarification (from either of your Q1 or Q2) then perhaps you could ask a more acute question or refer to my earlier proposal/reply and explain what I’m not making clear? The new forum content I add here, in regards to Q2, is that:

  • My end users will be accountants, their clients and small businesses (but will also involve accounting professional associations and accounting software providers).
  • This will add value to the OP ecosystem as these end users will either hold, or ideally buy to hold & transact with OP for use with the built apps (in the case of the products) or for to create custom ‘value creating’ marketing offers & benefits for their own firms (in the case of the accountants community currency). A second-wave benefit is that a whole new cohort of mainstream society will become exposed to OP and become adept at working with Web3, Ethereum and Layer 2 solutions, and this will ideally give them reassurance to integrate these technologies into their everyday businesses, and in the case of accountants, their client advice.
  • EDIT: Yes, these ideas might be a little hard to grasp at the start, as they are indeed unique (if you’re not a bookkeeper or accountant). They are not just another DEX, another Lending Protocol, another Yield product, or just another Aggregator of these. Not that Defi isn’t potentially the most disruptive and transformative tech sector of our generation, but these app and Dapp ideas I have in my Roadmap are a whole new product category. And this is another reason why they will add value to the OP ecosystem. That is, they will onboard a whole new demographic to OP and Ethereum, and not just appeal to, or cannibalize, the same group of crypto enthusiasts.

To answer your Q3 and Q4 I will refer you to my, as yet unwritten, Reply to solarcurve. Both of you have implied the same idea, so I will address the size and timing of the token request in my Reply to his post.

Thanks again for your question. I can pick up that your hesitant about my Proposal but you appear to be seeking more info before making a final decision, and I can’t really ask for much more of a chance than that. So thanks, and have a good day.

Kind regards,

Hi @solarcurve thanks for your patience with my reply. I’m going to frame my response, and why my Tokens Requested isn’t too high, but breaking it down into 4x Sections.

1) The Governance Fund as a whole

The Governance Fund has 230,000,000 OP that it will be distributing over the next six months (Optimism Gateway). Now that equates to about 13 fortnightly Phases. Which in turns means that each Phase should allocate approx 17,500,000 OP, if the Governance Fund is to meet its objectives. You’ll see from the Proposals in Phase 0 and 1 that this target isn’t being met at the current rate of allocations. Thus, my argument is that 2,000,000 fits neatly into the targeted allocation rate over the 6-months Governance Fund. And it doesn’t really make sense to argue that the full 230,000,000 shouldn’t be allocated. What, do we just burn the unallocated OP?! Because if that’s the best argument not to allocate all OP from the fund then why don’t we just cancel the whole process and burn the lot? It would make the current holders much wealthier in the short term, but it would fundamentally counter the Optimism Collective’s vision. That is, let’s make sure we allocate all these OP in the next 6-months as was, and is, the goal of the Fund.

Secondly, my Token Request is 0.87% of the total Governance Fund. This means that approx 115 other projects with a similar sized token request could be successfully proposed to the Governance Fund. That’s a great deal of start up investments in that quasi-portfolio. My argument is that 0.87% of the total fund, allowing 115 other equivalent investments, is not overweight or too high for one proposal. In particular when you add this argument to the one from the prior paragraph about the rate of Governance Fund OP allocations.

2) Seed (or Pre-Seed) Funding for Start Up Projects

You said…

And my shortest response is: “Kind of, yes”. But I view this as a seed funding round. I don’t believe I myself am totally unproven. I’m a mature, middle aged person, with more than a decade of professional experience in my field, I have very high levels of both academic and professional qualifications and credentials, and I have founded and run multiple small businesses that put me through studies and support me and my family now. So, I’m not exactly a a kid with no life experience but a bright idea asking for a bucket of others people’s money. But I’ll concede that my proposal is based on a concept. A concept that needs Seed Funding, or Pre-Seed Funding (whatever terminology you prefer).

If you search around, you’ll find the current average Seed or Pre-Seed Funding Round is anywhere between USD $3,000,000 to USD $5,000,000 (The current state of 2022 pre/seed investing | by Trace Cohen | May, 2022 | Medium) (A Guide to Raising Seed Funding in 2022). At today’s OP USD price, I’m asking for the OP equivalent of USD $1,030,000. Thus my argument is that my seed or pre-seed funding request is well below the lower bands of the average Seed or Pre-Seed Funding round in 2022, and thus not too great an ask.

Finally in this section, I see that you, yourself via Balancer had raised USD $3,000,000 Seed Capital in March of 2020 (Balancer Labs Raises $3M to Supercharge Programmable Liquidity | by Fernando Martinelli | Balancer Protocol | Medium), when Balancer was still indeed “very much a beta product” (New Balancer Token More Than Doubles in Price as COMP Drops Sharply). So while I’ll try not to call it hypocritical when you do this type of seed raise, but then 2-years later say:

I will instead try to appeal to you as someone who was in my position only a few years ago. That is, you knew why you asked for $3,000,000 and not something smaller, or something that was conditional. You knew what you needed to make the numbers add up. You knew how a successful, decently sized Seed Round could assist you implement your vision and really make Balancer a success. My argument is that I now ask for the same faith from this Optimism Collective community that Accomplice and Placeholder showed you.

3) Risk

It was mentioned earlier that there would be a ‘hoping for the best’. Well, yes, that is true. It’s true for all Proposals in all Phases and indeed all investments. We all hope for the best once we hand over our funds, and have to accept our given level of risk. And yes, there is risk.

But I argue that a lower token request actually increases the risk of my and some other projects. Too few tokens actually incentivizes fly-by-night capital, where small to medium sums are handed over, it’s churned through in three to six months, nothing gets traction, and bang! All the tokens are gone, and the team moves back to their old lives, or to the next short-term, ticking runway/minefield. A higher token ask increases responsibility and incentivises longer term thinking and plans. It creates a state of permanent dedication, not a ‘well lets so how this goes, and I’ll just go back to my old job in the new year if it doesn’t work out’ mentality.

As for the risk of just vanishing with the OP, or rugging my tokens, or doing other dodgy stuff, etc I argue thats why I’ve doxxed myself. I have a professional and personal reputation to protect and I also don’t want to be the most hated person in crypto. There is a risk that my concepts fail, but by doxxing myself and being public & transparent means there is little to no risk of me acting nefariously.

And finally for this section. Yes all these concepts and project might still all just go to s*** in the end. I never want to convey a guarantee of success. I can though offer my dedication, my full effort and I won’t let this project fail without a hell of a fight :slight_smile: But if you want to help me minimise this risk of failure, please see the conclusion.

4) Conclusion

  • Based on all the above arguments I believe my token request is fair, reasonable and importantly will be effective.
  • In the same vein, I believe that other Proposals are asking for too few tokens. Tokens shouldn’t just be handed over as a bribe for established products to come over to Optimism, and new projects should fund themselves adequately for the long term and not just provide a quasi-salary to a lone developer to work on something for six months.
  • I’m no longer frightened of asking for the tokens that I am, because at its core, I really want my project to shake things up in a very big way for very many people. And if I don’t have the courage to make the initial ask, how will I ever change the accounting industry and the world at large the way I want to, if I can realise the Summa vision.
  • The Tokens Requested will also not be lowered to 100,000 as @solarcurve recommended, as even he admits that probably wouldn’t change his position on the vote. Note: I am open to others who have similar recommendations, but a different outcome. E.g. “Axel, I’m an Against at 2M, but at 1M I’d become a For”. So, I’m interested to hear feedback if anyone fits into this category.
  • And finally, if you want to help me minimise the risk of this new project, then get involved! I’m open to advice from people who have been there and done that. And there’s safety in numbers, so even if you can’t provide specialist advice, then please get involved and become a supporter or follower or whatever. Welcome aboard, it’s Summa time :smiley:

Thanks for your time with this long post.

Kind regards,

I appreciate you taking the time to write all that out. I believe you and I simply have fundamental differences of opinion - and perhaps you are actually correct that Optimism must give out all the tokens and thus needs large asks like yours to enable that.

I believe we are NOT under any pressure to spend all the tokens in a certain time frame. Thus, my advice to you would be to go raise a seed round, prove your idea works, then return here and ask for OP incentives to pour additional fuel on that fire so to speak.

Happy for someone from Optimism to chime in and say I’m totally wrong, we have a desperate need to give out tokens, and using these funds as “seed round investments” is a good idea. Barring that I have to continue to be against this.

1 Like

I think that blockchain certainly needs more integration with tradfi, however I generally echo @solarcurve comments and believe that perhaps Phase 1 token allocations are not the right fit for your startup funding. Have you checked out Aelin? You could potentially use that protocol to raise funds. I’d also vote against this proposal at this stage.

Thanks for your input @Justin, although it’s a shame I couldn’t convince you with my proposal or my replies.

But for the record, and anyone that sees your reply (and this one), the accounting industry is not TradeFi. We are not considered financial services. A more appropriate classification is professional services or business services.
This clarity is important as the roles, activities and qualifications are very different, as are the industry’s practitioners, clients, professional associations and connected software services. I.e. This proposal is not targeting or working with TradFi. We are targeting and working with an, as yet, untapped demographic, and thus can have a great deal of impact for Optimism and Ethereum.

But again, huge thanks for your time and thought if you read through in full the proposal and the all the replies. I can’t ask for much more than that.

Kind regards,

I’ll reply here to the message that you sent on Kromatika’s Phase 1 proposal. I do not think that my comments on Kromatika’s proposal are inconsistent with my feedback on your proposal. Here is why:

Kromatika’s proposal calls for marketing and LP incentives, along with a small retro to early users of an existing protocol (please note that I am not a Kromatika early user – I had not heard of it until I read their proposal). Your proposal calls for 25% toward incentivizing future users and the rest (numbers 2-5) on your proposal goes toward early business development activities and insiders of a protocol that you will develop in the future. The two proposals are fundamentally different proposals.

Please keep in mind that I am expressing my own candid evaluation of your proposal. I’m one person with small voting power and I do not speak for the Optimism team. My feedback is essentially my opinion - That’s part of the reason why I started a conversation thread here:

Hi @Justin thanks very much for the reply and clarification.

Firstly, I want to say sorry for my last reply, as it was a reactive response that wasn’t well thought it. So I really appreciate your tolerance and your time to explain your briefer replies in more detail.

I was initially confused when you said you were "particularly drawn to using the tokens for marketing campaigns" as I believed you were referring to the other proposal using 70% of their token request for affiliate & influencer marketing, but you have now clarified that you were referring to the other 30% for LP Incentives and the Retro to Early Users.

The final thing I’ll say, to again explain my poor reaction, is that I don’t think that:

is again not the best way to describe my allocation.

I think a better way to briefly describe the allocation is:

  • 25% is for "using the tokens for marketing campaigns to onboard new users…efforts could reach beyond the mercenaries and lead to increased adoption". The community currency is all about incentivising education about & the adoption of OP, Ethereum and crypto as a whole.
  • 20% is for the team and insiders.
  • 35% is for project stability, longevity and long-term planning (ring-fenced from the team/insiders).
  • And the final 20% is again for incentivising usage and liquidity by accelerating product development (via external/outsiders teams) for the onboarding of a whole new cohort of the business community.

Thanks for your time, and thanks for letting me again clarify (or at least have a right of reply) to the way things had been described.

All the best with your voting activities, and still feel free to AMA if you need any clarification or concepts fleshed out.

Kind regards,


I’m bumping my Draft Proposal here as I’ll be transferring it from DRAFT to READY tomorrow (Asia timezone).
Thus I’m seeking any (1) final suggestions for improvement, or (2) constructive criticism (if it hasn’t been covered yet).

Thanks for your understanding with the Bump, and if you reckon it’s ready to move from DRAFT to READY then please leave a positive reply or just give the Proposal a Heart :heart:

Thanks for your time again.
Kind regards,

Hi @Axel_T, Thank you taking the time to answer all the comment and queries. As I dont have any accounting knowledge, I dont see the niche for this and unfortunately dont have any suggestion to improve this so I am might abstain myself from voting.
I would still encourage you to reduce the number of OP asked, Phase 1 an ongoing event and you can always submit a new proposal once this fund is exhausted.

1 Like

Thanks @OPUser I’ve always appreciated your constructive feedback and probing for more info.

For the record, while I’ll sleep on it, I’m looking into incorporating a Lock Up Period for 50% of the Requested OP, similar to Optimistic Railway & what we discussed earlier. This will be to increase transparency, incentivise cost control within Summa, and (ultimately) to calm the nerves and lower the risks of my comparatively large number of OP Requested. I’m going to sleep on it (it’s 10.20pm here now), and if I update the Draft tomorrow I’ll post it in #gov-temp-check on Discord to ‘ping’ anyone that the Draft had been changed.

Thanks again for all your input over the past week or so. If I’m successful in the vote then I look forward to bringing lots of accountants onboard into the ecosystem, and I’m sure they’ll help you get up to speed with your accounting knowledge :grinning:


1 Like

As an OP holder and (self) delegate with more than 0.0005% of voting power myself, I am now going to change this Proposal from DRAFT to READY.

As per my earlier discussed ‘overnight thinking’, I’ve decided against trying to offer a 50% Lock Up Period. This is because of the centralisation implications of trying to manage this. What would originally be a straight up & down vote would transform into a negotiation with 1 or 2 Delegates, or Optimism Foundation members, etc. It would be best to let my proposal stand or fall on its own, letting the community decide this, and not have 50% decided by the community and 50% decided by OP insiders only.

Overall, thanks for all you feedback. Here we go!
I’m still here to answer questions until Voting closes.
And if the Proposal in successful, then I definitely plan to be active in the community.
I hope we can all Stay Optimistic in our voting, and allow the realisation of the decentralised Web3 future (including all possible impacted industries) that we’re aiming for!

Kind regards,
:grinning: :handshake:


i an happy to hear the news that you, summa takes part in op eco.
i support you

1 Like

Thanks mate! I really appreciate the support @jjlee710 :smiley:

The voting results coming in today have been tough, but your personal comment has put me in a much better mood. Cheers!

Have a great day. Make sure you vote, if you haven’t already. And feel free to ask any questions or otherwise get in touch :slight_smile:

Kind regards,