Maybe there is a misunderstanding.
I am suggesting badgeholders rank projects (1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc) instead of giving an OP amount (20k OP, 100k OP, etc).
If you look at the results, A LOT of projects got ~50k or ~100k OP… basically round numbers, cause giving a specific number to each project is hard.
I think it would be better for the distribution if badgeholders were tasked with ranking projects instead of giving them an OP amount. In many ways it requires more critical thinking. They wouldn’t be able to say “These 10 projects all get 100k OP” they would have to determine which of those projects are better.
The underlying concept is that impact is qualitative (like the beauty of a sunset, not a test score), so its inherently hard (if not impossible) to quantify. Ranking allows badgeholders to sidestep the quantification.