RetroPGF 3: Insights and Reflections

O9nnli8GTWHXpB6J 5HYr 1

Retroactive Public Goods Funding (Retro Funding)

Retroactive Public Goods Funding (Retro Funding) serves as an economic flywheel within the Optimism Collective, incentivizing positive impacts. Without this funding, critical blockchain tools and infrastructure necessary for ecosystem sustainability and growth could be underfunded.

Optimism’s vision emphasizes the importance of public goods creation, fostering a collaborative ecosystem where shared success is prioritized.

Key Learnings from Retro Funding 3

Here are the key insights derived from RetroPGF 3:

  • The broad scope of rounds overwhelmed badgeholders and applicants.
  • Lack of standardized impact metrics made it challenging to objectively assess applications.
  • Self-selection of applications for review did not ensure equitable evaluation.
  • High volume of applications and weak eligibility criteria complicated the voting process.

These learnings, gathered from over 300 feedback submissions, will guide future iterations of Retro Funding.

Analyzing the Results

  1. Scale: RetroPGF 3 marked a significant increase in participants and recipients, with a 330% rise in applicants and 501 recipients.
  2. Impact Variance: There was a notable disparity in rewards, with top recipients receiving up to 6 times more than median recipients.
  3. Focus on Smaller Teams: Individual applicants received considerable rewards compared to larger teams.
  4. Optimism-Specific Contributions: Rewards primarily supported Ethereum public goods rather than specific Optimism-focused projects.

For detailed result analysis, refer to contributions by Optimism Contributors and Open Source Observers.

Application Process

To participate in RetroPGF 3, applicants underwent a revised application process:

  • Application period: September 19th – October 23rd, 2023
  • Review process: October 24th – November 1st, 2023, involving badgeholders in a jury-like review system.
  • Quality improvements included better alignment with voting criteria and integration of external data sources.

The application form received positive feedback for its usability and clarity.

Bugs, Errors & Timeline

Despite improvements, the application form encountered issues such as inaccurate data input due to technical bugs.

Application rule violations were significantly addressed compared to previous rounds.

Collecting the Right Information

Feedback highlighted the need for improved categorization and verification of impact metrics in future rounds.

Applicants were encouraged to disclose all relevant funding sources to ensure transparency.