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 
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
Thanks for your time with this long post.
Kind regards,
Axel
