As Season 6 concluded, we would like to share some insights and suggestions based on the data collected throughout the season. We hope this feedback will serve as both a reflection and a guide for improvement.
- Raising the bar on delegate participation
The disparity between voting participation and the rationale and feedback shared by delegates is both intriguing and deserving of thorough analysis. Although the first remains consistent across seasons, a small fraction of decisions is accompanied by thoughtful explanations or reflections. This lack of transparency significantly clouds the decision-making process, urging the need for a more open and accountable approach.
Encouraging delegates to actively share their reasoning and engage in forum discussions is more than a procedural improvement—it’s a step toward fostering a culture of accountability and thoughtful deliberation. Such practices also ensure that governance reflects the diversity of perspectives within the community.
- Streamlining Processes Without Losing Inclusivity
The introduction of Mission V2.5 during season 6 aimed to simplify the process by delegating sponsorships to the Grants Council and the Collective Feedback Commission, as they were responsible for creating them. This delegation of responsibilities has reduced the amount of downtime in the grants program and effectively decreased complexity. However, according to the data collected in our comparative report with the previous season, we have observed a decline in the number of mission sponsorships in general and also from actors outside these committees.
and
It’s key to ensure everyone in the Collective can help shape the DAO’s priorities. This reflection invites us to consider how to lower barriers for broader participation without compromising the gains in efficiency. While we understand that heading into Season 7, these mechanisms will likely differ due to the nature of the season, we consider it important to raise this concern for collective reflection.
- Reevaluating Delegate Representation
Delegate participation during Season 6 primarily focused on the Top 100 Delegates, nearly half of whom consistently engaged in proposals. However, restricting the focus to the Top 100 overlooks the contributions of committed delegates whose VP places them just outside this group
Rather than simply expanding the delegate range to include more participants—as suggested in previous seasons—we believe the focus should be on ensuring that the most active and committed delegates gain the visibility and influence they deserve, paving the way for them to rise into the Top 100.
- Understanding Impact Beyond Numbers Opportunity
One of the biggest challenges lies in assessing the impact of the DAO’s efforts. While large budgets and grants represent significant investments, their outcomes aren’t always easy to measure, especially in the short term.
Establishing a centralized repository to track the results of these initiatives could give the Collective valuable insights into what’s working—and what’s not. This approach could better align resources with meaningful outcomes and provide a clearer picture of the DAO’s overall progress.
- Best Practices
We believe that increasing participation in feedback and rationales is essential. The gap between voting participation and the rationale and feedback provided by our delegates demands attention. While voting activity remains consistent across seasons, it is interesting that a small portion of activity is shown in feedback and rationales. We expressed about this data in a previous post:
We’re not offering final answers here. We’re inviting the collective to explore these questions and help shape stronger, more inclusive, and transparent governance for Optimism.