Hi Karl!
It’s very exciting to see OP Labs looking to apply to Retro Funding 5!
It would be good to learn more on the already realized impact that the Custom Gas Token feature has generated to the Collective to better understand what the team is applying with and how Badgeholders will be able to assess the application based on impact (outcome and long-term effects) rather than inputs and output (development work + completed work).
I might be wrong, but I understand this feature was just released to production and hence no other team had been using it by August 2024 which is the scope for this round:
This is a really interesting situation thought, and I’d love to read others thoughts on it. I can definitely see a case for applying now to cover for the development work which has been completed and this can easily be measured and “paid for”. However, I feel we might be more prone to either overfund it (based on expected unrealized impact) which leads us away from the retro mechanism, or to underfund it if we only equate it to completed work.
Additionally, this brings a good consideration to have around eligibility criteria if we should be considering impact generated as when the output was created or when the benefits of said output were derived.
Looking forward to hearing other people’s thoughts.
This image might be useful to understand the logic model recently introduced to Badgholders which is in line with the traditional definition of Impact as understood in other fields outside of web3.
