Retro Funding 5: Voting Rationale Thread

First off, here’s my old but still accurate disclosure. With that out of the way, here’s how I voted:

Total Budget

8mm OP (maximum)

Why? Projects in RPGF 5 are existential for Optimism ecosystem. See my argument for not reducing budget here.

Allocation

  • Ethereum Core Contributions: 50%
  • OP Stack R&D: 35%
  • OP Stack Tooling: 15%

Why? Although I personally believe there are a handful of projects in the “Ethereum Core Contributions” category that do not belong there, I chose to ignore that and weight the allocations based on how existential each category is to Optimism as a whole.

Allocation Method

I used a custom allocation method using my own spreadsheet, see here.

See my reasoning for applying deductions for projects with revenue and grants here.

Post-Submission Q&A

How much time did you spend on voting in this round (in hours)?

20 hours

Please rate the voting experience

7

I was plagued by an annoying bug which I spent hours trying to fix myself (thinking it was an issue on my side), would appreciate better testing next time. Though to be fair, the bug was fixed in ~12hrs (on a weekend no less).

Also “Allocation method” didnt end up being useful to me (apart from inspiration), as I used my own spreadsheet to create my weights. But glad I was able to import CSV!

Overall despite the bug, better voting experience than RPGF 4, glad we got back a little bit more control over our ballots.

How worried are you about detrimental behavior among badgeholders influencing the allocation of Retro Funding in this round?

4 (somewhat worried)

It is a worry, though I have no evidence that it’s happening nor did anyone attempt to bribe me.

Given the design of this round, how confident do you feel that OP rewards will be allocated efficiently to the most deserving projects?

3

Funding per project is capped, without taking into consideration the # of recipients. RPGF therefore biases towards average project size, meaning its beneficial when you have the smallest number of beneficiaries. Thus I think projects with smaller headcount will receive disproportionately higher rewards.

I also strongly believe that grants / revenue should be deducted, and think most badgeholders probably wont do that.

To what extent did the “Grants and investment” information influence your token allocation among projects?

7 (had a large influence on my token allocation)

I strongly believe that grants / revenue should be deducted, so I used this information heavily.

7 Likes