[READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Optimistic Railway

[Justin]

Hey @OPUser, Mostly I have been putting significant weight into two main understandings:

1. there are two questions in the proposal template that ask specifically about usage and liquidity, but do not mention any other goals.

2. A central aspect of Optimism is the retroactive public goods funding. Given the spirit of not trying to pick future winners that i’ve read in Vitalik’s and optimism’s writing on the subject, i am concluding that the governance fund also isn’t designed to speculatively fund founding teams in the way that an angel or early round venture would. Rather, the incentives are intended to stimulate usage and liquidity of protocols that are already operating.

I am making assumptions because despite effort, I have not found much guidance. This is part of the reason why i added the post below. What is your take?

What is your Evaluation Criteria for Phase 1 Proposals?

Reading the proposals has been very educational and interesting. I can’t really find any evaluation criteria, so I am curious how you all plan to evaluate proposals. The OPerating Manual suggests that distributions “proactively incentivize future growth of projects and communities” which is pretty broad. The standard template questions narrow this down much further by specifically asking proposers to explain how their proposal will “incentivize usage and liquidity on Optimism”. I would plan …