# ScaleWeb3 - Delegate Communication Thread

**URL:** <https://gov.optimism.io/t/scaleweb3-delegate-communication-thread/3314>\
**Category:** Delegate Updates\
**Created:** [August 17, 2022, 11:49am UTC](https://gov.optimism.io/t/scaleweb3-delegate-communication-thread/3314 "2022-08-17T11:49:48Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 10

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ScaleWeb3](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/bc41dd/user_avatar/gov.optimism.io/scaleweb3/32/440_2.png) [@ScaleWeb3](https://gov.optimism.io/u/ScaleWeb3)\
**Post date:** [September 27, 2022, 11:25am UTC](https://gov.optimism.io/t/scaleweb3-delegate-communication-thread/3314/10 "2022-09-27T11:25:39Z")

</div>

Here are our votes for the current cycle:

Interest Protocol - Yes  
Socket - No  
OptiChads - Yes  
Kromatika - No (Don’t expect positive outcome of distribution of funds)  
Revert Compounder - Yes  
Bankless Academy - Yes  
Across Protocol - Yes  
Tarot - No  
Otterspace - No  
dHedge - Yes

This voting cycle was a bit chaotic with the new governance process, committees and delegate approvals. Nonetheless, we mostly followed the recommendations of the governance committees and see that their engagement with proposers during REVIEW ahead of voting improves final proposals.

We voted NO on the Kromatika proposal as we don’t see a strong positive impact on trade performance yet (DEX aggregation) and still doubt that the adjusted token distribution w/ lots of small-scale strategies have a lasting positive outcome: gas refund, marketing, referral marketing, airdrop, LM…

We just saw that Socket would accept a 60% Op cut if they succeed this round which would make it a great proposal to proceed. We hope they follow through. As we cannot be certain and don’t want to set a precedent for changing proposals during voting (tough to assess), we still voted “no” this time.

This round, we saw a couple of projects share multiple proposals to get the ball rolling and for follow-up grants. When submitted in one go, this makes it harder to go through for delegates & committees but we generally appreciate the move towards milestone payments. Hence, it would be best for projects to share one proposal, describe launch, goal, KPIs, finish date…follow-up proposal & submit that one later.

> [@\[READY\]\[GF: Phase 1 Proposal\] Karma Delegate dashboard](https://gov.optimism.io/t/ready-gf-phase-1-proposal-karma-delegate-dashboard/3411/12):
>
> Generally speaking, for Optimism grants, it might make sense to add tiers for funding requests. A good example is [Polkadot/Web3 grants](https://github.com/w3f/Grants-Program#hatching_chick-level-1--instagrants) which require different approvals & can be divided into
> 
> - InstaGrants: up to 10K for small tasks, projects and getting the ball rolling
> - Small Grants: up to 30K for small projects
> - Large grants: up to unltd. funding for large projects

**We voted with our new Delegate Address: Superdelegate.eth. Pls redelegate from ScaleWeb3.eth!**

---

_[View the full topic](https://gov.optimism.io/t/scaleweb3-delegate-communication-thread/3314)._