Hi everyone - to clarify a few points:
Round 3 badgeholder distribution:
Beyond adherence to the below policy, badgeholders do not need to justify their nominations. It is not the responsibility of the badeholder, nor the nominee, to explain if or how they meet the criteria suggested by the Foundation.
Badgeholders must not extend badges to co-workers, as defined:
- As a round 2 badgeholder, you’re not allowed to distribute your voting badge to a co-worker with whom you work on your primary project. “Primary” is defined as a project to which you dedicate >25% of working hours or derive >25% of your compensation.
- This rule is established to counteract the concentration of voting badges among the members of a small number of projects.
Citizenship criteria:
This is not the long term badgeholder distribution mechanism. Citizenship criteria will be set and approved via governance in the future. If you disagree with the criteria suggested by the Foundation and/or would like to suggest alternative criteria for determining Citizenship in the future, please leave constructive feedback here.
Engagement in governance conversations:
The Forum and/or other governance platforms are not a place to settle personal scores or make personal attacks. Governance conversations are subject to the Code of Conduct and the Forum is covered by the Rules of Engagement. Code of Conduct reports related to this issue have been filed and will be processed during the upcoming Reflection Period as Season 4 ends in four days.
Priorities:
Most importantly, I will echo Gonna’s comment above and retierate that we are on the cusp of launching RetroPGF Round 3 and Season 5 of Optimism Governance, which will include the Citizens’ House. These are huge milestones that will bring us closer to our Intents, the Superchain, and the Optimstic Vision.
We need everyone to stay focused on what we are building towards as a Collective; we can only accomplish what we need to in the next six months by working together. Remember, Intent #4 is Governance Accessibility. The conversation above currently works against that Intent and should be reframed to increase, rather than reduce, the accessibility of Optimism governance.