Reason: https://gov.optimism.io/t/alexsotodigital-eth-delegate-communication-thread/9332/17?u=alexsotodigital

Reason: https://gov.optimism.io/t/alexsotodigital-eth-delegate-communication-thread/9332/17?u=alexsotodigital

Reason: https://gov.optimism.io/t/alexsotodigital-eth-delegate-communication-thread/9332/17?u=alexsotodigital

Reason: https://gov.optimism.io/t/alexsotodigital-eth-delegate-communication-thread/9332/17?u=alexsotodigital

Reason: https://gov.optimism.io/t/alexsotodigital-eth-delegate-communication-thread/9332/17?u=alexsotodigital

Reason: https://gov.optimism.io/t/alexsotodigital-eth-delegate-communication-thread/9332/17?u=alexsotodigital

Reason: My vote prioritized technical competence, prior contributions to Optimism, and institutional diversity. I also voted for myself. While I bring more experience in governance operations, multisig processes, and protocol stewardship than in protocol engineering, I believe that perspective is valuable on a Council tasked with faithfully executing governance outcomes and maintaining operational discipline. I chose not to support OP Labs or INK Foundation, not because of any concern regarding their qualifications or alignment. Both are highly capable and important contributors to the Superchain. Rather, I believe distributing trust across a broader set of independent actors strengthens the resilience of the Collective and helps further the long-term goal of decentralization.

Reason: → Who I believe is a rockstar with what it takes to continue leading the council. I also think having this continuity will be good for maintaining accumulated knowledge.

Reason: I sought to prioritize actors with the longest track record of contributions (and incentives aligned with the Superchain), balancing teams and individuals, and approvals granted by the top 100 delegates.

Reason: While I recognize that the work of the OPSC is mission-critical, I believe that there were other roles in the collective that also had an increased workload during Season 7 and are not being compensated equally.

Reason: There is currently confusion about the usefulness of such a structure, and I believe halting its work may enable a better co-design space to identify the gap it leaves.

Reason: All of these councils are essential to the collective. Even with the limitation this may have (since it exceeds the cap), I prefer to highlight everyone's work equally.

Reason: I see this as one more step towards achieving our S8-9 intent, and I see no reason not to take it.

Reason: I’m glad the proposal has incorporated community feedback, and I think it’s good enough to move forward.

Reason: I understand that this change will help preserve the integrity of proposal outcomes and align voting behavior with intent. I see no reason not to do so.