This process has been a wonderful crash course for me in the amazing talent of the optimistic collective. Having limited
- information and prior knowledge of the majority of nominated projects
- limited time to fairly assess, to the (pedantic) degree I typically would
I have elected to vote for all nominees based on only the information provided in the project discovery profiles while also accounting for my personal user experience.
What this means is that my allocation is in many cases below the OP value I would allocate using a less standardised [randomised] approach yet a clear process allowed me to
- minimise bias through broad funding distribution
- assess & fund value creation on terms that I best understand
- support smaller teams, community growth & diversity
No doubt there are many other forms of value being created however this scoring profile reflects elements of value creation that I am confident to assess
| Purpose | Percentage | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Infrastructure | 0.00600 | Base score, all teams |
| Education | 0.00300 | Base score, all teams |
| Tooling | 0.00300 | Based score, all teams |
| Value | Percentage | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| User | 0.00075 | Support my web3 journey |
| OP | 0.00075 | Optimism specific focus |
| ETH | 0.00050 | ETH specific focus |
| Team | 0.00050 | Smaller teams < 16 >1 |
| Build | 0.00050 | Supports builders |
| Other | 0.00050 | Discretionary allocation |
| Community | 0.00030 | Expands Collective Community |
| Diversity | 0.00030 | Expands Collective Diversity |
| Governance | 0.00030 | Governance Application |
Voting Outcome
Based on this voting rationale I was able to allocate 0.97330. The remaining 0.02670 was split three ways to the top-scoring project in each category by adding 0.00890 to “Other” allocation. My top-scoring projects and unadjusted averages for each category are as follows
Education
Note I have abstained from voting for TE Academy
| Project | % Score |
|---|---|
| Kernel (Adjusted) | 0.0163 |
| ETHGlobal | 0.00570 |
| 0xPARC | 0.00530 |
| Week in Ethereum News | 0.00530 |
| RadicalXChange | 0.00510 |
| Optimism Ambassador collection | 0.00490 |
| Optimism en Español | 0.00490 |
| OptimismArabia | 0.00490 |
| Support NERDs collection | 0.00490 |
| Translators collection | 0.00490 |
| Unadjusted | Score |
|---|---|
| Mean | 0.00380 |
| Median | 0.00380 |
| Mode | 0.00300 |
| Range | 0.00290 |
Infrastructure
| Project | % Score |
|---|---|
| Solidity (Adjusted) | 0.01900 |
| Blobscan | 0.00830 |
| Erigon | 0.00830 |
| Infinitism (ERC-4337) - Account Abstraction | 0.00830 |
| MerkleTreeJS | 0.00830 |
| Safe (previously Gnosis Safe) | 0.00830 |
| Vyper | 0.00830 |
| Unadjusted | Score |
|---|---|
| Mean | 0.00770 |
| Median | 0.00780 |
| Mode | 0.00780 |
| Range | 0.00280 |
Tooling & Utilities
| Project | % Score |
|---|---|
| Commons Stack (Adjusted) | 0.01710 |
| Agora | 0.00610 |
| Gitcoin | 0.00590 |
| TypeChain | 0.00580 |
| Snapshot | 0.00570 |
| Otterspace | 0.00560 |
| Hop Protocol | 0.00560 |
| Pairwise | 0.00540 |
| Quark ID | 0.00540 |
| Attestation Station Interface | 0.00530 |
| Slither | 0.00530 |
| Smock | 0.00530 |
| Unadjusted | Score |
|---|---|
| Mean | 0.00450 |
| Median | 0.00450 |
| Mode | 0.00450 |
| Range | 0.00370 |
Given the approach I’ve taken, my thoughts are that if we include more binary questions and required more specified (quantitative) answers then much of the work to quantify funding allocation could be automated
Binary
- Is your project primarily Optimism focused Y/N
- Is your project primarily Ethereum-focused Y/N
Specified
- what resources were committed to work completed in the current funding period (quantify all that apply)
- what sources of funding do you currently have access to (quantify those that apply)
- what level of funding do you see as a fair reward for the impact delivered (select funding range)