StableLab Delegate Thread

Delegate Platforms
1

Delegate Profile

Name / Handle: StableLab
RSK Wallet Address: 0x4f62c4228f50875A2f3BE0921c4C2c41029A8BAe
RNS Name: stablelabdelegate.rsk
Social links:

1. Introduction

StableLab is a governance firm specializing in professional delegation, DAO framework design, and decentralized operations. We are active across major DeFi protocols like Sky, Optimism, Aave, and Uniswap and we are now fully committed to supporting Rootstock Collective as it grows its governance ecosystem.

With deep experience in DAO tooling, proposal design, and ecosystem incentives, our goal is to contribute to Rootstock’s unique vision of Bitcoin-powered DeFi with professionalism, transparency, and strategic insight.

1600Ă—900 145 KB

2. Vision & Focus

Rootstock is pioneering Bitcoin-secured DeFi, and we see a massive opportunity to bring structure, sustainability, and shared ownership to its governance layer.

Our priorities as delegates include:

  • Designing sustainable capital allocation programs (e.g. grants, incentives)

  • Strengthening governance architecture and delegate accountability

  • Supporting educational and onboarding initiatives to grow the delegate base

  • Improving proposal analysis, reporting, and impact evaluation frameworks

We aim to apply lessons from Ethereum-based DAOs while adapting them to the values and constraints of the Rootstock ecosystem.

3. Commitment & Community Engagement

StableLab participates in governance full-time and maintains an internal governance team to ensure:

  • Regular voting rationales are published on this thread

  • Direct communication with the community via the forum, Telegram, and Discord

  • Collaboration with other delegates, builders, and stakeholders

We are committed to maintaining high standards of responsiveness and transparency throughout our delegation.

4. Disclosures

StableLab contributes to governance in many protocols. We hold no material stake in any individual Rootstock-based project at the time of writing.

We will clearly disclose any relevant conflicts of interest in our rationales and abstain from votes where necessary.

5. Voting Rationales

This thread will be updated with a reply for each proposal we vote on, including:

  • Proposal title

  • Our vote (Yes / No / Abstain)

  • A short, clear explanation of our reasoning

Feel free to comment if you have questions or would like clarification on any of our decisions.

1 Like
2

2502 – Builder Activation: Wesatoshis Labs

Vote: Yes
Rationale: We are in favor of this activation. The product is promising, integrates well with key builders, and has ecosystem backing through a Rootstock grant. It supports innovation in Rootstock.

3

2502 – Builder Activation: SimpleFi

Vote: Yes
Rationale: I support SimpleFi’s Builder Activation for its seamless DOC integration, proven traction, and strategic market entry. It directly contributes to Rootstock payment adoption.

4

2502 – Builder Activation: Asami.club

Vote: Yes
Rationale: Asami is a valuable addition to Rootstock’s incentive loop. It combines real advertiser traction with a model that reinvests into the ecosystem and rewards backers, boosting sustainability.

5

2503 – Builder Activation: Sailing Protocol

Vote: Yes
Rationale: We support Sailing Protocol for its ability to enable 24/7 stock trading, on-chain dividends, and increased financial accessibility — expanding Rootstock’s DeFi ecosystem with RWAs.

6

2503 – Collective Rewards: Router Pay by Router Protocol

Vote: Yes
Rationale: This proposal provides clear value-add to Rootstock’s liquidity and UX. Strong technical team and solid ecosystem fit justify our support.

7

2503 – Collective Rewards: DZap Cross Chain Protocol

Vote: Yes
Rationale: DZap has a live product, strong traction, and multi-chain experience. Their DeFi automation tooling aligns well with Rootstock’s interoperability and composability goals.

8

Beexo Wallet – The Mobile Standard for Rootstock Adoption

Vote: Yes
Rationale: We support this builder activation. Despite process gaps, Beexo is live and adds value to Rootstock’s mobile UX, a key component for onboarding new users.

9

Grant Application – HypurrQuant

Vote: Yes
Rationale: We supported this small grant given the project’s early traction and potential to boost rBTC utility on Rootstock. It’s a lightweight but strategic contribution to ecosystem analytics.

10

Proposal: [2505 RootstockCollective Ambassador Proposal] Searching for Collective Ambassadors
Vote: Yes
Rationale: I supported this initiative because it’s a well-structured and regionally targeted pilot program designed to strengthen Rootstock’s community and content efforts. The inclusion of clear KPIs and a performance-based review makes it a promising first step.

11

Proposal: Vottun – Rootstock Developer Track

Vote: For

Rationale:
We support this builder activation as it aligns closely with the Collective’s goal of expanding Rootstock’s developer ecosystem. Vottun has an existing integration with Rootstock, a solid technical foundation, and a proven ability to execute, as shown by their successful hackathon collaboration in 2024.

The proposed “Rootstock Developer Track” leverages gamified quests, APIs, and practical learning paths to attract new builders and help them deploy real applications on Rootstock. This is a scalable initiative with low execution risk and strong alignment with ecosystem needs.

12

[25.06] Grant application - roketto [Wave 1]

Vote: Against
Rationale: I support what Roketto is building and see potential in their contribution to the Rootstock ecosystem. That said, I’ve leaned towards voting against this proposal in its current form. A more phased structure, starting with a smaller initial wave for testnet, and tying subsequent funding to concrete milestones like mainnet deployment, would improve alignment and reduce execution risk. I’d be happy to reconsider if a revised version is submitted.

13

2506 – Builder Activation: LayerBank
Vote: Yes
Rationale: I support this proposal as a strong builder activation. LayerBank brings real traction and a clear plan to contribute to Rootstock’s DeFi stack, with features like one-click leverage vaults and upcoming omnichain liquidity tools that can drive usage, capital efficiency, and long-term growth.

14

Proposal: Builder Activation – Symbiosis
Vote: For
Rationale: Symbiosis is already live on Rootstock and provides a valuable cross-chain bridge that aligns with our goal of improving interoperability. With over $4.3B in volume and strong multi-chain traction, this activation rewards meaningful infrastructure without requiring upfront funding. It’s a good example of value-first contributions that the Collective should continue to support.

15

Geyser – All-or-Nothing Crowdfunding with Rootstock

Vote: Against
Rationale:
I totally support the Geyser team and their mission to expand Bitcoin-native crowdfunding using Rootstock. That said, the current proposal is framed as a grant request ($20K), but the intention seems more aligned with the Collective Rewards program. Given the mismatch between format and intent, and in the interest of process clarity, I’m voting against the proposal in its current form. I’d encourage a re-submission under the proper category to keep things consistent and set the right precedent.

16

[25.06] Grant application - roketto [Wave 1 - Re-evaluated]

Vote: Against
Rationale:
I support the goal of making token launches easier and safer on Rootstock, and appreciate the team’s willingness to revise the proposal. However, even after the updates, key elements are still missing, especially clear Wave 1 milestones, public code or specs, and a stronger Rootstock-specific value proposition. As it stands, it’s not ready for a full grant. I’d recommend refining the plan and perhaps starting via Collective Rewards to build traction first.