Profile of Salome in Optimism

Posts by Salome

• [REVIEW][GF: Phase 1 Proposal V2] Prime Rating by Salome - No Role
  Posted on: Sept. 27, 2022, 3:14 p.m.
  Content: Hey @OPUser thanks a lot for your feedback, we hear you and hope we can clarify your concerns below. OPUser: DeFi is inherently risk and even after all this auditing, alpha, gamma and what not rating, hack is common. A simple conditional logic could lead to million is wrong hand. We 100 % agree that Web 3 is still risky and a rating framework cannot prevent hacks, stable de-pegs, death spirals, or whatever comes next. However, we’re also convinced that there are ways to reduce risks, and that an open-source framework fostering aggregated research from a community of raters (crowd intelligence), can serve as a powerful tool, leading to better informed web 3 participants. We will not be able to fully eliminate the pains mentioned above, but we can increase transparency and improve information flow and thus build a common ground for improved DYOR. About the conditional logic: The majority of the technical evaluation template is based on conditional logic (i.e. Yes/No questions), but not all of them. The fundamental report, on the other hand, uses targeted but open questions in combination with a scoring table, allowing for some subjectivity from the author. In addition, multiple raters can evaluate the same project and we use the average score to prevent outsized impact by one single rater. In combination, more than 50 unique components are assessed per protocol, this should mitigate the problem you mentioned above (we’d love to have yourself for instance participate and influence the ratings), and it also prevents that the template can be gamed by projects. In addition, the more targeted the framework becomes to a specific use case, the better the information accuracy, which is why we believe a custom framework for Optimism specifically would be ideal. We’d love to involve the Optimism community to customise the template to the realm of OP. If the community finds historic hacks are the most important indicator, we can include it in the report template (via Snapshot vote). As of today, hacks are covered via the technical review by penalising projects with a lower score (see example). OPUser: Here, when we support this proposal we are supporting the individual rating the project. Who is rating their credentials ? The community evaluates itself and credentials are gathered through contributions (we call it rating experience points => RXP). It’s a peer-review system, whereby analysts with higher experience evaluate the quality of work from others. In full web 3 manner - a world of anons - we can’t rely on traditional credentials, but aim to use on-chain credentials. You submit reports using your wallet address, you level up and get rewarded for your work with 10 RXP per report / 5 RXP per review (kinda like Proof-of-Work). This unlocks new positions such as “reviewer” (you can review other reports) and essentially you can become a governor (with 200 + RXP you can vote on accepting/rejecting a new report). A full overview of the levels can be found here. In case of an issue (e.g. false information in a report), there is a dispute process to resolve it. Let’s take a look at the examples you mentioned. Admittedly we discovered a data discrepancy between CREAM’s technical score on our site (previously 76 %) and the score provided by DFS ( 61 %). This is being adjusted to reflect the lower score, which reduced the overall rating as well. As mentioned above, hacks result in a penalty on the technical score. They’re highlighted on top of DFS’s review summary. We haven’t included them into our front end yet (we kept the UX rather lean and limited to the scores, for more detail the reports can be read), we’re open to frontend adjustments for the Optimism ecosystem rating dashboard!
  Likes: 4 Replies: 0
  Likers: lavi_primerating, bparlan, dabar90, hait
  No replies yet.
• [REVIEW][GF: Phase 1 Proposal V2] Prime Rating by Salome - No Role
  Posted on: Sept. 27, 2022, 11:14 a.m.
  Content: Hey @OPUser thanks a lot for your feedback, we hear you and hope we can clarify your concerns below. OPUser: DeFi is inherently risk and even after all this auditing, alpha, gamma and what not rating, hack is common. A simple conditional logic could lead to million is wrong hand. We 100 % agree that Web 3 is still risky and a rating framework cannot prevent hacks, stable de-pegs, death spirals, or whatever comes next. However, we’re also convinced that there are ways to reduce risks, and that an open-source framework fostering aggregated research from a community of raters (crowd intelligence), can serve as a powerful tool, leading to better informed web 3 participants. We will not be able to fully eliminate the pains mentioned above, but we can increase transparency and improve information flow and thus build a common ground for improved DYOR. About the conditional logic: The majority of the technical evaluation template is based on conditional logic (i.e. Yes/No questions), but not all of them. The fundamental report, on the other hand, uses targeted but open questions in combination with a scoring table, allowing for some subjectivity from the author. In addition, multiple raters can evaluate the same project and we use the average score to prevent outsized impact by one single rater. In combination, more than 50 unique components are assessed per protocol, this should mitigate the problem you mentioned above (we’d love to have yourself for instance participate and influence the ratings), and it also prevents that the template can be gamed by projects. In addition, the more targeted the framework becomes to a specific use case, the better the information accuracy, which is why we believe a custom framework for Optimism specifically would be ideal. We’d love to involve the Optimism community to customise the template to the realm of OP. If the community finds historic hacks are the most important indicator, we can include it in the report template (via Snapshot vote). As of today, hacks are covered via the technical review by penalising projects with a lower score (see example). OPUser: Here, when we support this proposal we are supporting the individual rating the project. Who is rating their credentials ? The community evaluates itself and credentials are gathered through contributions (we call it rating experience points => RXP). It’s a peer-review system, whereby analysts with higher experience evaluate the quality of work from others. In full web 3 manner - a world of anons - we can’t rely on traditional credentials, but aim to use on-chain credentials. You submit reports using your wallet address, you level up and get rewarded for your work with 10 RXP per report / 5 RXP per review (kinda like Proof-of-Work). This unlocks new positions such as “reviewer” (you can review other reports) and essentially you can become a governor (with 200 + RXP you can vote on accepting/rejecting a new report). A full overview of the levels can be found here. In case of an issue (e.g. false information in a report), there is a dispute process to resolve it. Let’s take a look at the examples you mentioned. Admittedly we discovered a data discrepancy between CREAM’s technical score on our site (previously 76 %) and the score provided by DFS ( 61 %). This is being adjusted to reflect the lower score, which reduced the overall rating as well. As mentioned above, hacks result in a penalty on the technical score. They’re highlighted on top of DFS’s review summary. We haven’t included them into our front end yet (we kept the UX rather lean and limited to the scores, for more detail the reports can be read), we’re open to frontend adjustments for the Optimism ecosystem rating dashboard!
  Likes: 4 Replies: 0
  Likers: Lavi_PrimeRating, bparlan, dabar90, hait
  No replies yet.
• [READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Yearn by Salome - No Role
  Posted on: Sept. 21, 2022, 4:50 p.m.
  Content: Salome again from Prime Rating :slight_smile: Happy to share some insights from our latest review 5 of Yearn. With an overall rating of A+ ( 89 %) Yearn is in the top 10 of our rated projects and is seen as one of the torchbearers of the DeFi industry. They have an excellent technical score of 93 % and a very good fundamental score of 84 %. With regards to this proposal, I noticed that the section on competitors, peers, or similar projects, which is part of the template, was not highlighted here. However, that’s probably also a very obvious one. Some of these competitors are for example Harvest Finance, Beefy.Finance or Vesper. Another player that can be seen as a competitor is Convex Finance, which exceeds Yearn’s market capitalization at this point. However, there is a key difference between the two. While Yearn is a token-unspecific yield aggregator, Convex focuses solely on CRV. Nevertheless, 5 days ago a teaser of $yCRV (yCRV is the latest generation of Yearn’s liquid veCRV wrapper product) got released that indicates Yearn entering a new area. As mentioned in this proposal Yearn has expanded into other chain like Fantom and Arbitrum, the vast majority of the TVL however is still locked up on the Ethereum chain. I am wondering if there are enough incentives and support from the Yearn ecosystem to push for the OP infrastructure? Is there any forecast on how much the OP incentives will boost the yields on the vaults mentioned? As Yearn is a trusted player with a strong reputation and is well positioned to bring a lot of value to Optimism I am in support of this proposal. In addition, Yearn’s in-house talent is widely accepted as top-tier. Multiple core contributors are thought leaders and influencers in the DeFi sectors that can bring value to the OP ecosystem.
  Likes: 2 Replies: 0
  Likers: lavi_primerating, omgcorn
  No replies yet.
• [READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Yearn by Salome - No Role
  Posted on: Sept. 21, 2022, 12:50 p.m.
  Content: Salome again from Prime Rating :slight_smile: Happy to share some insights from our latest review of Yearn. With an overall rating of A+ ( 89 %) Yearn is in the top 10 of our rated projects and is seen as one of the torchbearers of the DeFi industry. They have an excellent technical score of 93 % and a very good fundamental score of 84 %. With regards to this proposal, I noticed that the section on competitors, peers, or similar projects, which is part of the template, was not highlighted here. However, that’s probably also a very obvious one. Some of these competitors are for example Harvest Finance, Beefy.Finance or Vesper. Another player that can be seen as a competitor is Convex Finance, which exceeds Yearn’s market capitalization at this point. However, there is a key difference between the two. While Yearn is a token-unspecific yield aggregator, Convex focuses solely on CRV. Nevertheless, 5 days ago a teaser of $yCRV (yCRV is the latest generation of Yearn’s liquid veCRV wrapper product) got released that indicates Yearn entering a new area. As mentioned in this proposal Yearn has expanded into other chain like Fantom and Arbitrum, the vast majority of the TVL however is still locked up on the Ethereum chain. I am wondering if there are enough incentives and support from the Yearn ecosystem to push for the OP infrastructure? Is there any forecast on how much the OP incentives will boost the yields on the vaults mentioned? As Yearn is a trusted player with a strong reputation and is well positioned to bring a lot of value to Optimism I am in support of this proposal. In addition, Yearn’s in-house talent is widely accepted as top-tier. Multiple core contributors are thought leaders and influencers in the DeFi sectors that can bring value to the OP ecosystem.
  Likes: 2 Replies: 0
  Likers: Lavi_PrimeRating, omgcorn
  No replies yet.
• [REVIEW][GF: Phase 1 Proposal V2] Prime Rating by Salome - No Role
  Posted on: Sept. 21, 2022, 7:17 a.m.
  Content: Hi hi @AxlVaz thanks for pinging me, I just updated the proposal :slight_smile: Looking forward to the feedback from the Governance committees!
  Likes: 3 Replies: 0
  Likers: luukdao, lavi_primerating, bparlan
  No replies yet.
• [REVIEW][GF: Phase 1 Proposal V2] Prime Rating by Salome - No Role
  Posted on: Sept. 21, 2022, 3:17 a.m.
  Content: Hi hi @AxlVaz thanks for pinging me, I just updated the proposal :slight_smile: Looking forward to the feedback from the Governance committees!
  Likes: 3 Replies: 0
  Likers: LuukDAO, Lavi_PrimeRating, bparlan
  No replies yet.
• [REVIEW] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] dHEDGE (v2 revised) by Salome - No Role
  Posted on: Sept. 15, 2022, 8:57 p.m.
  Content: Salome from Prime Rating here, we were kindly asked by OP community members to support and be active in the evaluation of grant applications. We’re happy to share some of our insights! dHedge has previously been reviewed 3 on PrimeRating and by DeFi Safety. They received a good technical score of 76 % and a decent fundamental score of 63 %, resulting in a B+ overall rating (last updated June 16 , 2022 ). dHEDGE has around $ 12 million in TVL. $ 4 . 29 million in Polygon, $ 4 . 2 million in Ethereum and $ 3 . 47 million in Optimism. The number of investors giving money to fund managers has experienced a positive trend in dHEDGE, especially since the compatibility with Polygon & Optimism was enabled. Although the total addressable market is not very big yet, dHEDGE demand also matches the proportion of the whole hedge fund industry on the total asset value of the world, and the demand has also shown signs of growth despite market conditions. In this sense, it appears to have achieved some sort of market fit in an industry with similar growth potential as the whole crypto market. As mentioned in the proposal dHEDGE’s most direct competitor, with the most similar characteristics, is Enzyme Finance which has almost 4 times of dHedges TVL but is not compatible with Optimism yet. Nevertheless, it has the potential and capabilities to grow in the long term, as they are creating a very compelling alternative to Enzyme. With the right incentives, the chances of more users getting attracted to use dHedge on Optimism are probably high. Generally in favour of this proposal!
  Likes: 5 Replies: 0
  Likers: cyrus, moneymandoug, taminater, edson, hait
  No replies yet.
• [REVIEW] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] dHEDGE (v2 revised) by Salome - No Role
  Posted on: Sept. 15, 2022, 4:57 p.m.
  Content: Salome from Prime Rating here, we were kindly asked by OP community members to support and be active in the evaluation of grant applications. We’re happy to share some of our insights! dHedge has previously been reviewed on PrimeRating and by DeFi Safety. They received a good technical score of 76 % and a decent fundamental score of 63 %, resulting in a B+ overall rating (last updated June 16 , 2022 ). dHEDGE has around $ 12 million in TVL. $ 4 . 29 million in Polygon, $ 4 . 2 million in Ethereum and $ 3 . 47 million in Optimism. The number of investors giving money to fund managers has experienced a positive trend in dHEDGE, especially since the compatibility with Polygon & Optimism was enabled. Although the total addressable market is not very big yet, dHEDGE demand also matches the proportion of the whole hedge fund industry on the total asset value of the world, and the demand has also shown signs of growth despite market conditions. In this sense, it appears to have achieved some sort of market fit in an industry with similar growth potential as the whole crypto market. As mentioned in the proposal dHEDGE’s most direct competitor, with the most similar characteristics, is Enzyme Finance which has almost 4 times of dHedges TVL but is not compatible with Optimism yet. Nevertheless, it has the potential and capabilities to grow in the long term, as they are creating a very compelling alternative to Enzyme. With the right incentives, the chances of more users getting attracted to use dHedge on Optimism are probably high. Generally in favour of this proposal!
  Likes: 5 Replies: 0
  Likers: Cyrus, MoneyManDoug, Taminater, edson, hait
  No replies yet.
• [REVIEW][GF: Phase 1 Proposal V2] Prime Rating by Salome - No Role
  Posted on: Aug. 4, 2022, 9:52 a.m.
  Content: Project name: Prime Rating Author name and contact info (Discord): salomé# 0632 I understand that I will be required to provide additional KYC information to the Optimism Foundation to receive this grant: Yes L 2 recipient address: TBD Grant category: Tooling (Public Goods) Is this proposal applicable to a specific committee? No Project description (please explain how your project works): Prime Rating 10 is building a platform to enable a permissionless review framework for evaluating fundamental quality and technical risks of web 3 projects. Our mission is to foster transparency within the DeFi ecosystem and beyond, by enabling community-driven research through a unique “rate- 2 -learn & earn” approach. Everything is fully open source and enables anyone with the right expertise to contribute, learn, level-up and earn rewards. Through our methodology, we create in-depth assessments of protocols, which are displayed as simple letter ratings (from A+ to D). Our goal is to fast-track coordination within the web 3 ecosystem and facilitate decision-making for users, investors and builders. The rating reports are created in a seasonal approach. Each season is a 5 - 6 week long contest, where participants get rewarded for successful submissions and win additional prizes, based on quality and other criteria. The results of previous seasons can be seen on our app 10 in the form of 180 + protocols that were reviewed and regularly updated. We currently have three categories live, i.e. DeFi, Metaverse and ReFi. We would be more than happy to increase coverage of our ratings to protocols building on Optimism. Project links: Website: Prime Rating 10 Twitter: https://twitter.com/Prime_Rating 3 spinning off from https://twitter.com/PrimeDAO_ 1 Discord/Discourse/Community: Discord Please include all other relevant links below: Blog: https://medium.com/primedao/tagged/prime-rating 1 How to become a Rater: Permissionless Rating - Prime Rating Additional team member info (please link): Salome: https://twitter.com/SalomeBernhart 1 Lavi: https://twitter.com/Lavi_ 54 Thomas: https://twitter.com/xm 3 van 1 Luuk: https://twitter.com/LuukDAO Please link to any previous projects the team has meaningfully contributed to: Our core team members have previously contributed to and led initiatives in several web 3 projects, such as Index Coop, Balancer, Idle Finance, Yield Guild (YGG), TE, TEC, Longtail Financial, Paladin, the DAOist, Kolektivo and others. In addition, we bring academic-grade research experience as well as crypto-native investment research skills to the table. Our team members are also part of several web 3 builder communities, such as Kernel, Safary Club or Encode. With regards to contributions to Prime Rating, some previous supporters of our events are 1 kx, Celo and MetaPortal 1 . Moreover, we have a strong partnership with DeFi Safety for coverage of technical reviews. One of our latest public research contributions was this research paper about legal structures for DAOs: Costs and Benefits: Thinking Through Legal Structures for DAOs — PrimeDAO 2 And this research about enabling collateral in DeFi lending: Medium – 8 Jul 22 Enabling Collateral in DeFi Lending — Why Your Favorite Token Might Not be... 4 Authors: Lavi & Dabar 90 Reading time: 17 min read Relevant usage metrics (TVL, transactions, volume, unique addresses, etc. Optimism metrics preferred; please link to public sources such as Dune Analytics, etc.): 180 + protocols evaluated in DeFi, Metaverse & ReFi More than 350 unique fundamental and technical reports written (protocols can be reviewed more than once by multiple raters) Over 50 unique aspects evaluated per protocol (we evaluate a protocol’s value proposition, tokenomics, team, governance, code quality, security, documentation, testing and more) 7 rating events with over 60 raters 5 contributing (see on-chain reputation 1 ) ~ 3 k monthly views of our reports (with no marketing) Competitors, peers, or similar projects (please link): We are not aware of any direct competitors that do similar project deep-dives and token reviews like we do. And as far as we know there’s no competitor offering full ecosystem coverage of projects building on Optimism, but there are other projects that create ratings: https://baserank.io/ 3 List of Cryptoassets by Rating - Wikirating 1 Crypto Coins - Weiss Ratings 2 https://kryptview.com/ 1 Blockchain, Crypto Data, News & Ratings - TokenInsight 2 However, most of these ratings are based on other criteria than fundamental and technical quality reports. Is/will this project be open sourced?: Yes Optimism native?: No Date of deployment/expected deployment on Optimism: TBD - We expect to move our operational part to Optimism in October. Ecosystem Value Proposition: What is the problem statement this proposal hopes to solve for the Optimism ecosystem? Prime Rating’s proposal is based on the idea that a comprehensive, unbiased review and assessment of protocols is a mandatory requirement in a blockchain for common goods. We see our products and services as a complementary public good, to help users navigate an extremely fast-moving explorative ecosystem where it’s very cumbersome to keep up with all the developments. Our vision is to provide all Optimism users access to important information in an easy, professional-grade, and actionable format. Applying this strategy to all our products and services is how Prime Rating aims to reduce socioeconomic inequality. We decided to reach out to Optimism because it stands out not only for its capacity to scale but also for its commitment to pursuing the vision of decentralized public goods. Together, we believe that we can help foster a deeper culture of full transparency, increase safety, usability, and trust within Web 3 . How does your proposal offer a value proposition solving the above problem? Prime Rating creates much-needed transparency on quality and risk in DeFi. We aim to introduce a new Rating framework for Optimism, which will enable users to curate projects building within the Optimism ecosystem and sort them by quality. For the user, this means a powerful feature to better navigate around pitfalls and find the projects that actually have something to offer, according to their risk appetite and fit within the broader public goods ecosystem. In the end, we will contribute to a free, improved, and more resilient experience that increases user retention on Optimism. Moreover, we believe that our value proposition can help Optimism as a whole. As we will generate insights on the health of projects building on Optimism, which is an indicator of its overall ecosystem health. This can also include the creation of a regular ecosystem-report, to highlight developments and uncover potential gaps. At the same time, we aim to also foster income generation through our API and add-on services such as ratings on demand, custom research, and potentially advisory services. Imagine Rating as a potential research hub dedicated to the Optimism ecosystem, that can be leveraged for more than protocol deep-dives in the future. Why will this solution be a source of growth for the Optimism ecosystem? We believe the following key features will create sustainable sources of community growth, user growth and retention, and protocol growth: Improved user experience on Optimism, by providing a curated project overview and enabling new features (e.g. sort the dApp overview 1 by rating score, verified tick for protocols building on Optimism, inform on state of projects, etc.). New opportunity for Optimism’s community and analysts to contribute towards a meaningful mission, improving the ecosystem and making it more resilient. Unique, commons-oriented review framework for permissionless coverage of the full Optimism ecosystem, enabling easy and fast orientation for users, builders, and contributors. Attractive rewards and prizes for all participants, attracting the best analysts (~ 75 % of the grant will directly be used to reward community contributions). Foster full transparency about quality, risks, and impact for projects on Optimism. Thus improving partnership and coordination management between protocols building on Optimism. There is a real problem of voter fatigue, it is hard to read proposals. To ensure you are an informed voter, Prime Rating provides a highly sophisticated TLDR with its rating scores. Free learning effect for participants empowered via our review framework. This education for the OP community is an additional public good that comes with our events. Has your project previously applied for an OP grant?: No Number of OP tokens requested: 220 . 000 Did the project apply for or receive OP tokens through the Foundation Partner Fund?: No If OP tokens were requested from the Foundation Partner Fund, what was the amount?: n/a How much will your project match in co-incentives? (not required but recommended, when applicable): ~ 1 : 1 as in previous events, raters are awarded with OP and D 2 D tokens. In addition, raters receive a non-transferable experience and governance token called RXP and POAPs for participation and awards (see blog post 1 from past event). Proposal for token distribution: How will the OP tokens be distributed? (please include % allocated to different initiatives such as user rewards/marketing/liquidity mining. Please also include a justification as to why each of these initiatives align with the problem statement this proposal is solving.) ~ 75 % of the funds are used to reward participants during the rating events of Optimism dapps 1 . Upon successful submission, i.e. when reports passed governance, the raters are rewarded with 150 $ in OP + 200 D 2 D (reward can increase with higher levels). In addition, raters that submit the most reports or the best reports in terms of quality are awarded additional prizes. All insights generated during these events will be freely accessible via the website 10 and our API, that we’ll grant access to for Optimism-related information sites. 15 % will be used to create an Optimism specific framework that helps to evaluate its ecosystem. This will require partnerships with other protocols on Optimism to review the framework. The remaining 10 % will be used to cover some operational efforts to run the rating events. TLDR: The OP tokens will be used to facilitate between 4 to 6 Rating events (e.g. 4 DeFi + 2 Metaverse contests) for a time period of approximately 9 - 12 months. During these events, we will host 8 - 12 expert sessions (workshops or AMAs), to educate the community on fundamental analysis and risks in DeFi and Metaverse Each event will be having a kick-off session, where we’ll explain all that is needed to participate in detail We’ll set up specific communication channels to support the Optimism community and the raters, specifically to facilitate a great experience during the contests. To promote the events and to attract the best talents, we’ll conduct regular social media, marketing campaigns and Twitter push. In terms of marketing, we’ll of course also place the Optimism logo on our website We’ll also host Twitter spaces to share insights, and if requested we’re more than happy to produce 2 - 3 research articles about overall findings and to condense the insights generated via the protocol deep-dives. Over what period of time will the tokens be distributed for each initiative? Shorter timelines are preferable to longer timelines. Shorter timelines (on the order of weeks) allow teams to quickly demonstrate achievement of milestones, better facilitating additional grants via subsequent proposals. Over a time period of 9 - 12 months depending on how many successful report submissions of fundamental rating reports from the community are received. Please list the milestones/KPIs you expect to achieve for each initiative, considering how each relates to incentivizing sustainable usage and liquidity on Optimism. Please keep in mind that progress towards these milestones/KPIs should be trackable. M 1 - Customise FA report template and adjust infrastructure to enable coverage of Optimism-based protocols M 2 - Organise first rating event within 1 month of receiving the grant M 3 - Ensure initial coverage of at least 30 - 35 protocols via the first and second event M 4 - Grow the community branch dedicated to Optimism to at least 15 raters regularly engaging and continuously writing and updating protocol reviews M 5 - Increase coverage to at least 50 protocols until end of Q 4 2022 M 6 - Have the newly created ratings shared via API integration with at least two information outlets dedicated to Optimism (this comes in addition to a real-time updated dashboard in our rating app). M 7 - Create an ecosystem report, summarising the insights generated from the ratings M 8 - Ensure updating and coverage increase over Q 1 & Q 2 of 2023 and updating of ecosystem overview report when new insights are gained. It’s our goal to regularly report and update on progress made, by sharing them in this forum. Why will incentivized users and liquidity on Optimism remain after incentives dry up? Prime Rating enables users to navigate in a space without boundaries and room for exploration, we guide users to help do their own research before interacting with new dApps. Interacting with apps on Optimism should work flawlessly. Our platform will continue to be updated as a means of discovery for users looking to use applications on Optimism. In addition, the data collected and ratings that Prime Rating published will continue to exist on IPFS and be useful for users who seek to interact on Optimism. In a space where most information is public and code open source, the value of data lies in its curation, sense-making and how you apply it in the right context. Currently, Prime Rating offers two services to fully sustain itself in the future. Specific Report on Demand (RoD) requests, general research requests, copywriting and our API allow us to open our rating data to an even wider audience. Also, in the near future, we are interested in launching a framework to facilitate deeper synergistic relations, help in the evaluation of Governance proposals and gain voting power between the two communities.
  Likes: 19 Replies: 0
  Likers: prometheus, youjun888, nicoproducto, axlvaz, lavi_primerating, scasur, luukdao, moneymandoug, fav_truffe, luizfernando, bobbay_stablelab, crypto_queen, jl.sachse, bparlan, sixty, dabar90, maintainer.eth, hippotangmo, hait
  No replies yet.
• [REVIEW][GF: Phase 1 Proposal V2] Prime Rating by Salome - No Role
  Posted on: Aug. 4, 2022, 5:52 a.m.
  Content: Project name: Prime Rating Author name and contact info (Discord): salomé# 0632 I understand that I will be required to provide additional KYC information to the Optimism Foundation to receive this grant: Yes L 2 recipient address: TBD Grant category: Tooling (Public Goods) Is this proposal applicable to a specific committee? No Project description (please explain how your project works): Prime Rating is building a platform to enable a permissionless review framework for evaluating fundamental quality and technical risks of web 3 projects. Our mission is to foster transparency within the DeFi ecosystem and beyond, by enabling community-driven research through a unique “rate- 2 -learn & earn” approach. Everything is fully open source and enables anyone with the right expertise to contribute, learn, level-up and earn rewards. Through our methodology, we create in-depth assessments of protocols, which are displayed as simple letter ratings (from A+ to D). Our goal is to fast-track coordination within the web 3 ecosystem and facilitate decision-making for users, investors and builders. The rating reports are created in a seasonal approach. Each season is a 5 - 6 week long contest, where participants get rewarded for successful submissions and win additional prizes, based on quality and other criteria. The results of previous seasons can be seen on our app in the form of 180 + protocols that were reviewed and regularly updated. We currently have three categories live, i.e. DeFi, Metaverse and ReFi. We would be more than happy to increase coverage of our ratings to protocols building on Optimism. Project links: Website: Prime Rating Twitter: https://twitter.com/Prime_Rating spinning off from https://twitter.com/PrimeDAO_ Discord/Discourse/Community: Discord Please include all other relevant links below: Blog: https://medium.com/primedao/tagged/prime-rating How to become a Rater: Permissionless Rating - Prime Rating Additional team member info (please link): Salome: https://twitter.com/SalomeBernhart Lavi: https://twitter.com/Lavi_ 54 Thomas: https://twitter.com/xm 3 van Luuk: https://twitter.com/LuukDAO Please link to any previous projects the team has meaningfully contributed to: Our core team members have previously contributed to and led initiatives in several web 3 projects, such as Index Coop, Balancer, Idle Finance, Yield Guild (YGG), TE, TEC, Longtail Financial, Paladin, the DAOist, Kolektivo and others. In addition, we bring academic-grade research experience as well as crypto-native investment research skills to the table. Our team members are also part of several web 3 builder communities, such as Kernel, Safary Club or Encode. With regards to contributions to Prime Rating, some previous supporters of our events are 1 kx, Celo and MetaPortal. Moreover, we have a strong partnership with DeFi Safety for coverage of technical reviews. One of our latest public research contributions was this research paper about legal structures for DAOs: Costs and Benefits: Thinking Through Legal Structures for DAOs — PrimeDAO And this research about enabling collateral in DeFi lending: Medium – 8 Jul 22 Enabling Collateral in DeFi Lending — Why Your Favorite Token Might Not be... Authors: Lavi & Dabar 90 Reading time: 17 min read Relevant usage metrics (TVL, transactions, volume, unique addresses, etc. Optimism metrics preferred; please link to public sources such as Dune Analytics, etc.): 180 + protocols evaluated in DeFi, Metaverse & ReFi More than 350 unique fundamental and technical reports written (protocols can be reviewed more than once by multiple raters) Over 50 unique aspects evaluated per protocol (we evaluate a protocol’s value proposition, tokenomics, team, governance, code quality, security, documentation, testing and more) 7 rating events with over 60 raters contributing (see on-chain reputation) ~ 3 k monthly views of our reports (with no marketing) Competitors, peers, or similar projects (please link): We are not aware of any direct competitors that do similar project deep-dives and token reviews like we do. And as far as we know there’s no competitor offering full ecosystem coverage of projects building on Optimism, but there are other projects that create ratings: https://baserank.io/ List of Cryptoassets by Rating - Wikirating Crypto Coins - Weiss Ratings https://kryptview.com/ Blockchain, Crypto Data, News & Ratings - TokenInsight However, most of these ratings are based on other criteria than fundamental and technical quality reports. Is/will this project be open sourced?: Yes Optimism native?: No Date of deployment/expected deployment on Optimism: TBD - We expect to move our operational part to Optimism in October. Ecosystem Value Proposition: What is the problem statement this proposal hopes to solve for the Optimism ecosystem? Prime Rating’s proposal is based on the idea that a comprehensive, unbiased review and assessment of protocols is a mandatory requirement in a blockchain for common goods. We see our products and services as a complementary public good, to help users navigate an extremely fast-moving explorative ecosystem where it’s very cumbersome to keep up with all the developments. Our vision is to provide all Optimism users access to important information in an easy, professional-grade, and actionable format. Applying this strategy to all our products and services is how Prime Rating aims to reduce socioeconomic inequality. We decided to reach out to Optimism because it stands out not only for its capacity to scale but also for its commitment to pursuing the vision of decentralized public goods. Together, we believe that we can help foster a deeper culture of full transparency, increase safety, usability, and trust within Web 3 . How does your proposal offer a value proposition solving the above problem? Prime Rating creates much-needed transparency on quality and risk in DeFi. We aim to introduce a new Rating framework for Optimism, which will enable users to curate projects building within the Optimism ecosystem and sort them by quality. For the user, this means a powerful feature to better navigate around pitfalls and find the projects that actually have something to offer, according to their risk appetite and fit within the broader public goods ecosystem. In the end, we will contribute to a free, improved, and more resilient experience that increases user retention on Optimism. Moreover, we believe that our value proposition can help Optimism as a whole. As we will generate insights on the health of projects building on Optimism, which is an indicator of its overall ecosystem health. This can also include the creation of a regular ecosystem-report, to highlight developments and uncover potential gaps. At the same time, we aim to also foster income generation through our API and add-on services such as ratings on demand, custom research, and potentially advisory services. Imagine Rating as a potential research hub dedicated to the Optimism ecosystem, that can be leveraged for more than protocol deep-dives in the future. Why will this solution be a source of growth for the Optimism ecosystem? We believe the following key features will create sustainable sources of community growth, user growth and retention, and protocol growth: Improved user experience on Optimism, by providing a curated project overview and enabling new features (e.g. sort the dApp overview by rating score, verified tick for protocols building on Optimism, inform on state of projects, etc.). New opportunity for Optimism’s community and analysts to contribute towards a meaningful mission, improving the ecosystem and making it more resilient. Unique, commons-oriented review framework for permissionless coverage of the full Optimism ecosystem, enabling easy and fast orientation for users, builders, and contributors. Attractive rewards and prizes for all participants, attracting the best analysts (~ 75 % of the grant will directly be used to reward community contributions). Foster full transparency about quality, risks, and impact for projects on Optimism. Thus improving partnership and coordination management between protocols building on Optimism. There is a real problem of voter fatigue, it is hard to read proposals. To ensure you are an informed voter, Prime Rating provides a highly sophisticated TLDR with its rating scores. Free learning effect for participants empowered via our review framework. This education for the OP community is an additional public good that comes with our events. Has your project previously applied for an OP grant?: No Number of OP tokens requested: 220 . 000 Did the project apply for or receive OP tokens through the Foundation Partner Fund?: No If OP tokens were requested from the Foundation Partner Fund, what was the amount?: n/a How much will your project match in co-incentives? (not required but recommended, when applicable): ~ 1 : 1 as in previous events, raters are awarded with OP and D 2 D tokens. In addition, raters receive a non-transferable experience and governance token called RXP and POAPs for participation and awards (see blog post from past event). Proposal for token distribution: How will the OP tokens be distributed? (please include % allocated to different initiatives such as user rewards/marketing/liquidity mining. Please also include a justification as to why each of these initiatives align with the problem statement this proposal is solving.) ~ 75 % of the funds are used to reward participants during the rating events of Optimism dapps. Upon successful submission, i.e. when reports passed governance, the raters are rewarded with 150 $ in OP + 200 D 2 D (reward can increase with higher levels). In addition, raters that submit the most reports or the best reports in terms of quality are awarded additional prizes. All insights generated during these events will be freely accessible via the website and our API, that we’ll grant access to for Optimism-related information sites. 15 % will be used to create an Optimism specific framework that helps to evaluate its ecosystem. This will require partnerships with other protocols on Optimism to review the framework. The remaining 10 % will be used to cover some operational efforts to run the rating events. TLDR: The OP tokens will be used to facilitate between 4 to 6 Rating events (e.g. 4 DeFi + 2 Metaverse contests) for a time period of approximately 9 - 12 months. During these events, we will host 8 - 12 expert sessions (workshops or AMAs), to educate the community on fundamental analysis and risks in DeFi and Metaverse Each event will be having a kick-off session, where we’ll explain all that is needed to participate in detail We’ll set up specific communication channels to support the Optimism community and the raters, specifically to facilitate a great experience during the contests. To promote the events and to attract the best talents, we’ll conduct regular social media, marketing campaigns and Twitter push. In terms of marketing, we’ll of course also place the Optimism logo on our website We’ll also host Twitter spaces to share insights, and if requested we’re more than happy to produce 2 - 3 research articles about overall findings and to condense the insights generated via the protocol deep-dives. Over what period of time will the tokens be distributed for each initiative? Shorter timelines are preferable to longer timelines. Shorter timelines (on the order of weeks) allow teams to quickly demonstrate achievement of milestones, better facilitating additional grants via subsequent proposals. Over a time period of 9 - 12 months depending on how many successful report submissions of fundamental rating reports from the community are received. Please list the milestones/KPIs you expect to achieve for each initiative, considering how each relates to incentivizing sustainable usage and liquidity on Optimism. Please keep in mind that progress towards these milestones/KPIs should be trackable. M 1 - Customise FA report template and adjust infrastructure to enable coverage of Optimism-based protocols M 2 - Organise first rating event within 1 month of receiving the grant M 3 - Ensure initial coverage of at least 30 - 35 protocols via the first and second event M 4 - Grow the community branch dedicated to Optimism to at least 15 raters regularly engaging and continuously writing and updating protocol reviews M 5 - Increase coverage to at least 50 protocols until end of Q 4 2022 M 6 - Have the newly created ratings shared via API integration with at least two information outlets dedicated to Optimism (this comes in addition to a real-time updated dashboard in our rating app). M 7 - Create an ecosystem report, summarising the insights generated from the ratings M 8 - Ensure updating and coverage increase over Q 1 & Q 2 of 2023 and updating of ecosystem overview report when new insights are gained. It’s our goal to regularly report and update on progress made, by sharing them in this forum. Why will incentivized users and liquidity on Optimism remain after incentives dry up? Prime Rating enables users to navigate in a space without boundaries and room for exploration, we guide users to help do their own research before interacting with new dApps. Interacting with apps on Optimism should work flawlessly. Our platform will continue to be updated as a means of discovery for users looking to use applications on Optimism. In addition, the data collected and ratings that Prime Rating published will continue to exist on IPFS and be useful for users who seek to interact on Optimism. In a space where most information is public and code open source, the value of data lies in its curation, sense-making and how you apply it in the right context. Currently, Prime Rating offers two services to fully sustain itself in the future. Specific Report on Demand (RoD) requests, general research requests, copywriting and our API allow us to open our rating data to an even wider audience. Also, in the near future, we are interested in launching a framework to facilitate deeper synergistic relations, help in the evaluation of Governance proposals and gain voting power between the two communities.
  Likes: 17 Replies: 0
  Likers: Prometheus, youjun888, NicoProducto, AxlVaz, Lavi_PrimeRating, scasur, LuukDAO, MoneyManDoug, Fav_Truffe, luizfernando, Bobbay_StableLab, bparlan, Sixty, dabar90, maintainer.eth, Hippotangmo, hait
  No replies yet.