Any technological means to reduce the difficulty of work is good, but achieving it by depriving the rights of the project is clearly wrong.
3 Likes
Unlike screening round, so many people feel the need to get reviewed.
And things go in the weird direction.
Many badgeholders feel the need to do something too. (Thank you @Gonna.eth )
Letting it go like this til the end is really wrong. This hurt OP ecosystem, contributors, educators, builders.
5 Likes
Whatās going on?
1. The process!
In as much as the process/design of this round is great, I feel like it doesnāt fit in this round due to the number of applicants;
- The ballot threshold - considering the No. of applicants, it seems to be overwhelming for this set of badge holders; over 600 projects (x3 RPGF2). This surely will leave less known or new projects with few or no ballots at all; we already seeing it as we have 5 more days to go.
With this limited time, I feel most badge holders will put well-known projects above fewer projects in their ballots due to the time constraints (60 so far out of 644 projects).
The truth is most lesser projects are what give a boost to bigger projects; take for instance educators, if they do not keep talking/sharing their knowledge about these big protocols (with huge funding) with their communities and audience, how will people keep going to those protocols?
For example, I have spent months writing updates about several projects in the superchain ecosystem (new, existing, and OP-funded projects), providing my audience insights on these projects on Mirror, Twitter, Lens, etc. See here
A lot of these protocols even rely on paying ambassadors to spread the word about their project; thatās to tell how important educators are.
If these small and underdog projects donāt get the reward they deserve, thereās really no motivation for them to keep contributing to the collectiveā¦ even if they do, thatās another whole year of supporting the collective before another RPGF round. Meanwhile, biggups to the badge holders noticing these small projects 
- The list - The lists are great but as we can see, only a small % of projects make the overall list so far. why? Making it hard for a project thatās not on a list to get ballots.Thanks to everyone who has tried to create a list to be seen easily by the BHs.
My input
Why have ballots when BHs can just vote on a project? having to give ballots, and then have to vote to allocate again can be stressful for the BHs. If a project has reached the 17 threshold, it shouldnāt be voted on anymore; divert your efforts to other projects.
If each badge holder votes on 5 applications throughout the period, itās enough to review every application.
There are over 150 badge holders and less than half havenāt voted with 5 days to go. 
Iām aware that the BH are volunteers, but they agreed to take this position for a reason; will there be a penalty for BH who do not exercise their duties? as it will affect a lot of projects that will not make this round.
I love the design of this round but it seems not to align because of the Number of projects that have applied. I really hope everyone who has made an impact gets rewarded duly.
For every BH seeing this, hereās my contribution to the ecosystem so far and I really hope youāll see this and evaluate it accordingly. Optimism Agora
As always letās stay Optimistic and I wish every applicant the best of luck. 
5 Likes
Dear Badgeholders,
I am Maxime, co-founder of Web3xplorer, a dedicated and non-monetized directory for Ethereum and its Layer 2 networks, like Base and Optimism.
As the RetroPGF voting process unfolds, I feel compelled to share both my personal reflections and broader concerns that Iāve observed in the community, especially on the RetroPGF Discord channel and Twitter.
1. The Human Aspect of Voting
The past few weeks have been a period of growing anxiety for me, seeing Web3xplorer not included in any ballot or lists. This concern extends beyond my project; many impactful initiatives on Optimism are in a similar situation.
Itās a stark reminder of the profound impact your votes have. Behind each project are people - entrepreneurs, innovators, and dreamers whose livelihoods and aspirations perhaps hinge on your decisions.
2. Understanding Your Challenge
I acknowledge the immense challenge you face as badgeholders. Curating just 15 projects for an unofficial āAdoption Underdogsā list took me half a day. Considering the scale of ~650 projects youāre reviewing, I can only imagine the enormity of your task. Your dedication is truly commendable, and the responsibility you hold is significant.
3. Tools to Assist Your Review
To aid in your evaluation, I recommend three tools offering a quick overview of the ballot distribution:
These platforms can help identify projects that, though perhaps lesser-known, are deserving of your attention and support and might not have been included in many ballots.
4. A Call for Inclusive Consideration
In this crucial final week of voting, I urge you to use these tools and consider the less visible projects. Each vote you cast shapes the future of an initiative and, by extension, the lives of those whoāve poured their hearts into them. Your choices not only support individual projects; they uphold the vibrant diversity and innovation of our entire ecosystem.
Letās aim for a balance that acknowledges both the established and the emerging, ensuring every part of our community, big or small, is recognized and valued.
5. Enhancing the Voting Process in Future RetroPGF Rounds
For future RetroPGF voting, I recommend two specific improvements.
- First, financial compensation for badgeholders is essential. Allocating a part of the RetroPGF budget for this acknowledges their extensive efforts.
- Second, I suggest a more structured two-phase voting approach. Initially, a select group of badgeholders with recognized expertise could be āvoted inā as champions, tasked with creating curated lists based on their knowledge. In the second phase, the wider badgeholder community can vote, utilizing these expertly curated lists as a guide. This method would streamline the process, ensuring both in-depth analysis and broader community participation.
Implementing these changes would not only make the voting process more manageable but also ensure that it is more balanced and fair, giving due consideration to all projects in our vibrant community.
Thank you for your commitment and thoughtful consideration during this impactful process.
Warm regards,
Maxime
PS: If you want to support Web3xplorer, here is the link to Agora: Optimism Agora
8 Likes
10 Likes
A very important point about Feedback in RetroPGF3 which should be taken into account in the creation of the next RetroPGF3: Learnings & Reflections
But unfortunately I have a feeling that during the current RetroPGF(3) it will not be possible to change this . Great post @nanobro
3 Likes
Itās sad if we canāt change that.
Btw thank you for reading ser. I have more than 200 OP related content.
They have high impact among Thailand community.
And I also translated them to ENGLISH 
too!
If possible, please check my application so OP ecosystem can grow at faster rate. Optimism Agora
3 Likes
We translators whose role is described in official Optimism Docs.
74-voluntary translators have translated Optimism articles,help docs(Crowdin).
(about 651,485 translated words.)
We are trying to push boundaries of language and embrace the communityā¤ļø
3 Likes
agree with this completely.
But overall, having projects that are VC funded with more funds than this whole RPGF3 is providing is really a boogie matter.
What do these VC funded projects expect to get with 1% more funds on top of VC funds, that they can get from this RPGF3 round, I presume not much in terms of product development.
But, that 1% could change a lot for a whole ecosystem of small projects that supports Optimism ecosystem, and that are not VC funded.
It should not be a zero sum for VC funded projects as well, 1% of RPGF3 invested in smaller projects in this round will bring them more than 1% through their product usage, if their product is a market fit for an ecosystem.
5 Likes
Something to brighten your day everyone! Hope youāll have an optimistic week.
And just in case youāre a badgeholder, donāt forget to check my application ayohtunde and OP Community Contributors
GL to everyone.
7 Likes
I agree with you!
For instance, hereās feedback from someone who found my content useful in the OP discord server subscribed to me on Mirror, and even connected with me.
He discovered 3 new OP Stack chains through my contents on Mirror.
2 Likes
Bigger projects have exponentially more resources than any of us smaller ones. But at the same time they are also in a position to create a bigger impact for the ecosystem.
Many projects (including mine) will most likely not get to the 17 ballots mark. RetroPGF may be very helpful in keeping a lot of small projects afloat, as opposed to the well funded projects that have exponentially more capital and human resources, have a huge presence in the industry and easily recognizable by everyone. So question does arise if they should even apply if they already have got more than enough.
But at the same time, RetroPGF is open to anyone that has made a contribution. If it is encouraging both small projects and giants to make contribution to the OP ecosystem, then it is fair game. In the end, it is the OP ecosystem that will benefit from the presence of these well funded projects have exponentially more capital and human resources, have a huge presence in the industry and easily recognizable by everyone. They are better positioned to make impact given their track record. Even If they are dedicating greater resources with hopes of getting rewarded, it is still a positive impact of RetroPGF. But yeah each of them deserves individual.
That reflects my opinions for the applicant side. But on the voting side, I feel that the 17 ballots rule may mostly stack against smaller projects
3 Likes
I agree with every word!
Today our project (Optimism_CIS) has far fewer votes than other regional projects, although we have impressive metrics for the last months.
We sincerely donāt understand how, with the next contribution to the ecosystem, we still donāt have even half of the minimum threshold of votes.
Since submitting the application:
- The delegation pool has grown from 38k OP to 61.55k and the number of addresses from 93 to 132
- Ambassadors Program course views from 1.5k to 2k
- AMA, podcasts, and Twitter reach have also increased significantly.
Optimism Agora
Iām not talking about individual contributions where Iāve been creating content and engaging the CIS community for over 8 months 
6 Likes
Tbh def should consider tiers
10k requires 5 ballots
50k requires 10 ballots
200k requires 17 ballots
The current meta of people posting on x for apps to review/all the vc backed bs, needing to shill props in the channel is pretty garbage, see alot of small projects on like 2-10, meanwhile Alchemy who raised 100mns get >20, Bankless have like 8 apps. Like i get the reason for threshold but this design sucks, def should scale not be binary yes/no funds. We know badgeholders arent going through 600 and the alternatives requiring holders to blindly follow a list.
8 Likes
While RetroPGF3 is in progress it is difficult to change anything, but I think that with all this great feedback we will create an even better system in the future.
@nanobro of course I know you very well from the Optimism discord server and I know that you are doing a great job for your community and the Collective.
I wish you a great result 
3 Likes
I also believe that contributors on a voluntary basis
dedicated ONLY to Optimism should be rewarded.
I wish you all the best and good results
2 Likes
I think the issue I see is the 17 vote requirement. While it should be required to have 17 votes for a 100k grant, it seems rather unnecessary for a 2k grant. a lot of the smaller projects are in this category. They would be happy to walk off with a $1,500 or 2k grant as a token of appreciation for their contribution. But the 17 vote requirement makes this all but impossible. Our project currently only has 3 votes so we are unlikely to meet quorum unless an influx of badge holder start to put it on list and vote for us. Optimism Agora
4 Likes
Thank you for mentioning the core OP community contributors. I wish you good results
Stay Optimistic
2 Likes
This is Blocktrend (åå”å¢), RetroPGF3 participants from Taiwan.
I wrote an article to discuss RetroPGF3 and want to give some advice to badgeholders and RetroPGF4.
The article was originally written in Chinese, and we constantly translate all of our content into English as below:
English: RetroPGF 3: A Lavish 1.6 Billion Social Experiment - by čرęę©
Chinese: RetroPGF 3ļ¼č±Ŗę² 16 åē大åē¤¾ęåÆ¦é© - by čرęę© - åå”å¢
1 Like
And it also raise some discussion like this
1 Like