Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
ccarella
@ccarella.eth
Projects that applied but do not meet the eligibility criteria on OP Retro Funding 4. https://gov.optimism.io/t/retro-funding-4-eligibility-criteria-enforcement/8303
4 replies
3 recasts
15 reactions
seneca
@seneca
rounds rektd
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Toady Hawk 🟡 ⌐◨-◨
@toadyhawk.eth
No way. Clearly FIDs aren’t being counted as unique addresses? How did they come up with 5 uniques, rounds must have dispersed funds to thousands of wallets by now.
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
ccarella
@ccarella.eth
The period counted was from Jan 1 to May 1. I don't remember the timing if Rounds, it feels like it's been with us forever.
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
seneca
@seneca
we easily have 10k+ unique claims over that period. the reason we don't qualify is because we initiate the txs on users behalf (good ux: no need for user to have eth or even have to sign the tx) so instead of 10k+, we have 5 addresses claiming. rules are rules i guess but it does sting. onwards.
3 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
Michael Gingras (lilfrog)
@frog
Sounds like it’s possible to challenge — I would hope optimism is able to be reasonable and see the truth here. Maybe worth a shot?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
