Profile of mariorz in Optimism
Posts by mariorz
-
New RPGF3 Distribution Disparity Data
by mariorz - No Role
Posted on: Jan. 26, 2024, 8:04 p.m.
Content: I’m aware of missions and intents, but regardless if you want to call that “investment” or not, distributing OP to protocol users will have a direct effect on sequencer revenue data. A clear example would be an AMM protocol that distributes OP to their LPs. The liquidity increase from such incentives would automatically result in increased arbitrage transactions and sequencer revenue. That’s just a mathematical fact. So again, the sequencer revenue data above is only part of the story and could be very misleading if we don’t subtract the OP value the collective has paid as incentives to users of each of those protocols.
Likes: 2
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
New RPGF3 Distribution Disparity Data
by mariorz - No Role
Posted on: Jan. 26, 2024, 5:31 p.m.
Content: I think what you are asking would derail from this thread’s core discussion on ‘Distribution Disparity’ in sequencer revenue data. I am trying to stay on point and explain that using only sequencer revenue is an incomplete picture and we must take into account how much the Collective invested to incentivize the growth of the protocols in the data shown above. Furthermore, I’m confused as to why you keep bringing up VC investment, which is completely irrelevant to this topic as explained in the Impact=Profit framework from the Collective. While I’ve proposed above a method I believe would more fairly reward the application layer, I suggest moving that discussion to a dedicated thread for more focused engagement.
Likes: 3
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
New RPGF3 Distribution Disparity Data
by mariorz - No Role
Posted on: Jan. 26, 2024, 3:57 p.m.
Content: I believe simply if at least 33 % of the total RPGF pool had flowed to the top onchain impact creators I think perhaps you are not wanting to realize that this “top onchain impact” is a direct result of OP grants that some of these protocols have received and distributed to their users. The fact that they are the largest creators of sequencer revenue is already a great and positive result, in itself, for the developers of such protocols. I’ll say it again, If you subtract the OP grants these protocols have awarded to users to incentivize growth, we would get a much more accurate picture of which are generating onchain profit, and which are so far an investment the Collective has made that has not yet given positive returns.
Likes: 2
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
New RPGF3 Distribution Disparity Data
by mariorz - No Role
Posted on: Jan. 26, 2024, 3:04 p.m.
Content: I’m aware of missions and intents, but regardless if you want to call that “investment” or not, distributing OP to protocol users will have a direct effect on sequencer revenue data.
A clear example would be an AMM protocol that distributes OP to their LPs. The liquidity increase from such incentives would automatically result in increased arbitrage transactions and sequencer revenue. That’s just a mathematical fact.
So again, the sequencer revenue data above is only part of the story and could be very misleading if we don’t subtract the OP value the collective has paid as incentives to users of each of those protocols.
Likes: 2
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
New RPGF3 Distribution Disparity Data
by mariorz - No Role
Posted on: Jan. 26, 2024, 12:31 p.m.
Content: I think what you are asking would derail from this thread’s core discussion on ‘Distribution Disparity’ in sequencer revenue data. I am trying to stay on point and explain that using only sequencer revenue is an incomplete picture and we must take into account how much the Collective invested to incentivize the growth of the protocols in the data shown above.
Furthermore, I’m confused as to why you keep bringing up VC investment, which is completely irrelevant to this topic as explained in the Impact=Profit framework from the Collective.
While I’ve proposed above a method I believe would more fairly reward the application layer, I suggest moving that discussion to a dedicated thread for more focused engagement.
Likes: 3
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
New RPGF3 Distribution Disparity Data
by mariorz - No Role
Posted on: Jan. 26, 2024, 10:57 a.m.
Content:
I believe simply if at least 33 % of the total RPGF pool had flowed to the top onchain impact creators
I think perhaps you are not wanting to realize that this “top onchain impact” is a direct result of OP grants that some of these protocols have received and distributed to their users. The fact that they are the largest creators of sequencer revenue is already a great and positive result, in itself, for the developers of such protocols.
I’ll say it again, If you subtract the OP grants these protocols have awarded to users to incentivize growth, we would get a much more accurate picture of which are generating onchain profit, and which are so far an investment the Collective has made that has not yet given positive returns.
Likes: 2
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
New RPGF3 Distribution Disparity Data
by mariorz - No Role
Posted on: Jan. 26, 2024, 3:33 a.m.
Content: I agree that better incentivization of the application layer is crucial. And while It’s important to consider sequencer revenue as a signaling metric, we must adjust for OP incentives given to each protocol’s users. Overlooking this would unfairly favor established protocols, already benefiting from OP incentives, and deter new entrants. Additionally, many valuable applications like vfat, debank, or zapper, which primarily read smart contract data, play a vital role despite generating very little or non-direct sequencer revenue. I actually believe that Gitcoin-style quadratic funding rounds would be a better way to incentivize the application layer. This approach harnesses the collective insight of users, who are often very aware of which apps are providing substantial public goods without direct charges.
Likes: 2
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
New RPGF3 Distribution Disparity Data
by mariorz - No Role
Posted on: Jan. 25, 2024, 10:33 p.m.
Content: I agree that better incentivization of the application layer is crucial.
And while It’s important to consider sequencer revenue as a signaling metric, we must adjust for OP incentives given to each protocol’s users. Overlooking this would unfairly favor established protocols, already benefiting from OP incentives, and deter new entrants.
Additionally, many valuable applications like vfat, debank, or zapper, which primarily read smart contract data, play a vital role despite generating very little or non-direct sequencer revenue.
I actually believe that Gitcoin-style quadratic funding rounds would be a better way to incentivize the application layer. This approach harnesses the collective insight of users, who are often very aware of which apps are providing substantial public goods without direct charges.
Likes: 2
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
New RPGF3 Distribution Disparity Data
by mariorz - No Role
Posted on: Jan. 24, 2024, 9:32 p.m.
Content: I’m arguing that if we are going to use sequencer revenue as a signal for distribution we need to discount the OP value, coming from previous grants, distributed to each protocol’s users. If a protocol generated 1 ETH of sequencer revenue for a certain period, but it paid out 5 ETH to its users via grants from the Collective, then the effective profit from that protocol was 1 ETH - 5 ETH = - 4 ETH.
Likes: 2
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
New RPGF3 Distribution Disparity Data
by mariorz - No Role
Posted on: Jan. 24, 2024, 9:10 p.m.
Content: alexcutlerdoteth: How about we put it this way… what % of RPGF funds do you think should’ve ideally gone towards the application layer projects directly driving usage on chain? How would you choose to distribute that percentage amongst them? I think using sequencer revenue as one signal is a good idea, but we need to discount from that the OP value, coming from previous grants, distributed to each protocol’s users. Additionally, there is a lot of value in some projects, like open-source libraries we all use, that won’t directly generate sequencer revenue at all. And I don’t think those should be excluded from future RPGF rounds.
Likes: 2
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
