Pairwise is part of the latest funding mechanism to hit the scene: Deep Funding. Deep Funding, supported by Vitalik Buterin, allocates $250K to impactful Ethereum ecosystem open source dependancies using an innovative approach that combines Deep Graph with Deep Learning AI. This initiative unites leading Web3 organizations, including Eval Science, Pairwise, Drips, Open Source Observer, Gitcoin’s Allo Protocol, and VoiceDeck.

In this blog, we’ll explore:

• What Deep Funding is

• How it benefits the community

• How Pairwise is involved

• How you can get involved

Deep Funding is built on two core elements: Deep Graph and Deep Learning.

Most public goods funding mechanisms evaluate projects individually, often overlooking the broader, interconnected network of contributions that amplify their impact. Deep Graph changes this by analyzing how foundational infrastructure, collaborative synergies, and dependencies contribute to the Ethereum ecosystem’s overall value.

This approach highlights the "networked impact" of projects, demonstrating that true value often emerges from the dynamic interplay of multiple efforts working in harmony—like pieces of a complex puzzle.

Deep Learning leverages advanced AI models to assess these connections and allocate funds effectively. Think of it as the "engine" driving the funding mechanism, with regular "checkpoints" provided by expert decision-makers acting as the "steering wheel" to ensure human alignment.

The first pilot of Deep Funding focuses on solving a critical challenge: Which open-source dependencies (OSS) of Ethereum should receive funding, and at what level? Backed by $250,000 in prizes, this pilot is structured to evaluate and reward the most impactful contributions to Ethereum’s ecosystem.

How the Pilot Works:

1. Mapping Ethereum’s Dependencies:

   • A deep graph has been created to map Ethereum’s 40,000 open-source dependencies and their interconnections.

   • Nodes represent individual dependencies, and edges highlight how they relate to one another.

2. Allocating Weights:

   • A market of AI allocators assigns weights to the graph, determining the relative importance of each dependency.

   • The weights answer key questions like: “What is the relative impact of dependency A  and dependency B on [project]?”

3. Spot-Checking by a Jury:

   • A jury of experts validates the proposed weights by performing spot-checks on random parts of the graph.

   • This process ensures that funding decisions are aligned with human judgment while leveraging the scalability of AI.

4. Distributing Funds:

   • The model that aligns most closely with the jury’s spot-check preferences determines the final allocation of funds.

Deep Funding addresses several limitations of traditional funding mechanisms, including:

AI models reduce human bias, time consumption, and knowledge gaps, ensuring fairer assessments. Projects no longer need to allocate resources to marketing or awareness campaigns, as funding decisions focus solely on their impact.

Deep Funding uncovers underappreciated yet vital contributions, such as cryptographic projects that form the backbone of Web3 infrastructure. These initiatives often remain hidden from mainstream recognition despite their critical importance.

By analyzing all available data, Deep Funding ensures a hyper-aware, data-driven approach to resource distribution—bringing inclusivity and precision to funding decisions.

• December 12th: Data on 40,000 Ethereum dependencies released for model building.

• January 20th: Sample spot-check data provided by jury members for model training.

• January 20th: Early bird prize submission deadline for open-source models (50% reserved for early bird submissions).

• February 20th: Model submission deadline.

• February 27th: Results announced.

These deadlines incentivize early contributions while providing ample time for refinement and submission.

Pairwise plays a pivotal role in the human “checkpoint” aspect of Deep Funding, helping jury members compare repositories.

Jury members will assess questions like: "What is the relative impact of the developer contributions on [project]?"

Results will be a reference point for when jury members spot check AI models and choose the model with the closest to the human approach. 

Evaluating projects on a long list is overwhelming. Pairwise simplifies the process by presenting users with side-by-side comparisons, enabling quick, relative judgments. This method reduces cognitive load and transforms governance into an engaging and straightforward experience.

Pairwise has proven its effectiveness in Retro Funding 6 on Optimism, where 2,660,000 OP (out of a total 3.5M OP) was allocated using the tool. Initially tested in RetroPGF 3, Pairwise has continuously improved through feedback from each funding round. In Retro Funding 6, features like liquid democracy were introduced, enhancing decision-making flexibility.

We’re incredibly grateful to Devansh and the Deep Funding team for inviting Pairwise to play an essential role in advancing capital allocation in Web3.

Contributors can win a share of the $250K prize pool provided by Vitalik:

• $170K: Funding Ethereum GitHub repos based on edge weighting by the winning model.

• $40K: Prizes for models aligning with jury spot-check evaluations.

• $40K: Prizes for innovative open-source models, with early bird rewards.

Explore Deep Funding in detail at deepfunding.org.

Pairwise is redefining governance by making decision-making intuitive and enjoyable. Want to integrate Pairwise into your governance processes? Contact us here.

Deep Funding represents a groundbreaking evolution in funding impactful projects. With its combination of Deep Graph, Deep Learning, and guidance from Vitalik, this initiative is set to revolutionize how we allocate resources in Web3. Don’t miss your chance to be part of the future!

With liquid democracy, votes are generally categorized and you can vote on every vote in every category or delegate to anyone that you trust to vote or delegate for you in each specific category. For example, imagine you're confident about environmental policy but less so about healthcare or economics. You could vote directly on environmental issues, delegate healthcare to your nurse friend Alex, and economics to someone like Juan Ramon Rallo, a Spanish economist. This way, your vote aligns with expertise and values, while you can reassign it at any time.

Pairwise launched another Optimism Collective experiment, offering the broader community an opportunity to engage in Retro Funding decision-making. During Retro Funding 6, Badgeholders, Delegates, Token Holders, and Guest Voters participated in the Pairwise experiment to promote projects, educate the community, and foster collaboration and network effects within the Superchain, while also testing liquid democracy to advance the voting process for Retro Public Goods Funding.

Through Pairwise, participants could vote on the categories where they felt confident and delegate the rest to trusted users on Farcaster. This flexibility ensured that expertise guided decision-making, whether participants were ranking projects themselves or passing their voting power to someone better suited for a specific topic.

The RF6 results give us a perspective into the minds of Optimism’s different members. Let’s unpack the rankings from Badgeholders, Guest Voters, Delegates, and Token Holders to see where their priorities align—and diverge.

The chart above shows that all stakeholder groups prioritized Governance Infrastructure & Tooling, but their behavior varied in percentage allocation. Guests assigned the smallest percentage to infrastructure and the largest to analytics and leadership. Delegates and Holders had a similar structure, but Holders were more conservative with the budget, taking the difference from infrastructure and tooling compared to Delegates. Citizens allocated the highest overall budget. Holders and delegates, represent  would prefer to spend less funds 

Badgeholders put Ethereum Attestation Service (EAS) at the top of their list, recognizing its critical role in governance infrastructure. Other highly-ranked projects, like RetroList and RetroPGF Hub, also focused on tools to strengthen the governance ecosystem.

Key Insight: Badgeholders seem to value projects that provide foundational infrastructure, ensuring the ecosystem has the tools it needs to grow.

Guest voters had a slightly different focus, with leadership projects like numbaNERDs and GovNERDs earning top spots. These projects emphasize community-driven leadership and governance analytics, highlighting a strong preference for strategic guidance.

Key Insight: Guest voters may be more drawn to visionary projects that drive the governance conversation forward.

Delegates ranked EAS first, echoing Badgeholders’ infrastructure-first mindset. However, they also showed strong support for leadership initiatives like the Optimism Security Council and analytics projects like numbaNERDsin the top 5.

Key Insight: Delegates appear to value a mix of stability, leadership and analytics.

Token Holders focused heavily on Governance Infrastructure & Tooling and Governance Leadership, with projects like EAS and RetroList ranking highest. Leadership initiatives, such as Optimism Security & Grants Council, also gained notable support, while analytics-focused projects like Superchain.Eco received comparatively less attention.

Key Insight: Token Holders prioritized stability and vision, emphasizing infrastructure and leadership over analytics.

1. Infrastructure Is King: Across most groups, governance infrastructure projects consistently came out on top. These tools are the backbone of a thriving ecosystem.

2. Leadership Matters: Token holders, Guest Voters and Delegates demonstrated a clear preference for leadership-driven initiatives, underscoring the importance of strategic governance.

3. Analytics Gain Traction: Analytics projects resonated strongly with Guest Voters, signaling a growing interest in data-driven decision-making.

4. Liquid Democracy Works: By allowing the broader community to engage at their comfort level, liquid democracy and Pairwise proved that decentralized governance can be both inclusive and effective.

For a deeper analysis of Pairwise allocations check https://www.pairwise.vote/rf6-results

Retro Funding Round 6 was an exciting step toward the DAO dream: communities truly having a say in the decisions that shape their world. Right now, many DAO governance models rely on a small handful of representatives.

Retro Funding Round 7 is coming soon, and we’re building on everything we’ve learned so far. The next experiment is just around the corner—and we’d love for you to be part of it.

Let’s face it, deciding which projects should get funding is not always as simple as picking your favorite restaurant for dinner. When the stakes are high, it can feel like an impossible task. That’s where Pairwise comes in — to help you vote in a way that’s not only manageable but with moments of delight as you work your way through lists, selecting left or right on pairs as they appear and leveraging the round-result ranking to help you make fund allocation calculations. 

Pairwise is also participating in Retro Funding 6 as an applicant and we could use your support! Jump to the bottom of this article to find out how.

Imagine this scenario: You’re a badgeholder in Retro Funding 6, ready to dive into voting, but suddenly you’re faced with 100+ projects, all clamoring for funding. Your mind races. Which one is the most impactful? How can you compare them all fairly? You try to sift through all the information, but before long, your brain starts feeling like it’s stuck in quicksand. 

This cognitive overload is a genuine problem. Retro Funding is designed to distribute funds to the projects that truly deserve them, but when voters are overwhelmed, it’s easy to either rush decisions or disengage altogether. You want to make informed choices, but figuring out where to start? That’s a whole other challenge.

Here’s where Pairwise becomes your new best friend. Rather than forcing you to rank dozens or even hundreds of projects all at once, Pairwise simplifies the process by presenting you with just two projects at a time. It’s like a Web3 version of a "Would You Rather?" game.  Which project made the bigger impact? Pick one, and then move on to the next set of two. Rinse, repeat, vote done.

Simple & Fast: Instead of sitting there for hours feeling like you’re drowning in options, Pairwise breaks it down. Just two projects. Side by side. You compare them, and in no time, you’re moving through the list. It’s like voting in bite-sized pieces! 

Less Stress, More Fun: Remember those times when voting felt like a chore? With Pairwise, it’s different. The small, rapid comparisons keep your brain fresh and engaged. It’s more like playing a quick-fire game of “Which is Better?” rather than trying to cram for a final exam. No panic attacks, we promise.

No Math Degree Required: Don’t worry about trying to rank every single project perfectly. Pairwise’s algorithm is the true hero behind the scenes. It combines all the comparisons you (and other badgeholders) make, automatically creating a fair and accurate ranking. You don’t have to worry about the big picture—Pairwise takes care of that for you, like a Web3 Sorting Hat. 

More Fair Results: This process of comparing two projects at a time levels the playing field. Projects get considered one-on-one, so you can give each project the attention it deserves. The final results? A more balanced, fair outcome that reflects the collective wisdom of the community.

In Retro Funding 6, Optimism is pioneering an innovative approach to governance with an experimental application of liquid democracy, and Pairwise is right at the heart of this initiative.

Unlike traditional voting methods, liquid democracy gives you more flexibility in how you engage with Retro Funding. If you’re feeling uncertain or overwhelmed by the voting process, you can delegate your voting power on specific categories to others within the community who you believe will make informed decisions. In turn, delegates can pass along voting power to others if they prefer, allowing a fluid transfer of decision-making authority through trusted community members. This means your vote can go to someone you trust, without requiring you to dive into every detail yourself.

This experiment aims to help more people within the community contribute meaningfully without the mental load of assessing each individual project. By trying out liquid democracy, we’re exploring ways to make Retro Funding a more inclusive, decentralized, and manageable experience for everyone.

Ready to experience this yourself?

👉 Try liquid democracy in the current Retro Funding 6 round with Pairwise and see how this evolving approach can simplify your decision-making process while letting your voice be heard.

In Retro Funding 6, Optimism is experimenting with expert and non-expert voters. Experts are likely super busy and already have many things on their mind. Non-expert voters likely have less experience calculating fund allocation. Pairwise is a game-changing tool that makes voting both time and mentally efficient. 

By breaking the process down into smaller comparisons, Pairwise helps you:

• Avoid decision fatigue: No more stressing over long lists and rankings.

• Make quicker, more focused votes: Each project gets equal attention, and you can move faster.

• Enjoy the voting experience: Let’s be honest—no one likes drowning in spreadsheets. With Pairwise, voting feels lighter and easier to tackle.

• Contribute to a fairer process: Your choices matter, and the way you compare projects one by one results in more thoughtful and balanced outcomes for everyone.

BADGEHOLDERS & GUEST VOTERS:

1. Go to the Optimism voting UI.

2. Allocate budget.

3. Click on "Vote using Pairwise."

4. Allocate budget again 🤯.

5. Rank your category.

6. Edit results and export to the main UI.

7. Cast your ballot.

Alternatively, come back to Pairwise for the experiment.

Not only does Pairwise make the process easier, but it also creates a sense of fairness. Projects don’t have to compete for your attention in a crowded list—they’re presented head-to-head, taking out the noise. 

With RF6 just around the corner, now’s the perfect time to simplify your voting experience. Let Pairwise take the headache out of ranking projects, so you can focus on the projects that really matter.

👉 Use Pairwise to cast your vote in Retro Funding Round 6. Voting doesn’t have to be stressful—Pairwise makes it quick, easy, and, dare we say, fun!

In Round 4, we engaged the wider community by categorizing 230 projects and allowing various stakeholders to participate. The insights gathered were invaluable in shaping Pairwise to better serve badgeholders in RF5, refining our approach for a more focused and impactful experience.

Retro Funding 5: Voting

Voting is now live for Retro Funding 5: OP Stack

https://round5.optimism.io

Pairwise is an open-source voting dapp designed to simplify the Retro Funding 5 voting process by allowing badgeholders to compare projects in pairs, transforming these micro-decisions into a comprehensive ranking. This method is intuitive and minimizes decision fatigue, ensuring a more enjoyable voting experience.

For Round 5, we’ve introduced the Star Ratings system—a new feature designed to help you categorize projects by impact. With five levels of ratings, you can quickly identify and prioritize the most influential projects:

• ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ → Very high impact

• ⭐⭐⭐⭐ → High impact

• ⭐⭐⭐ → Medium impact

• ⭐⭐ → Low impact

• ⭐ → No impact

This star system serves as a quick filter to segment projects, while pairwise comparisons sort projects within each category, refining their rankings further. This method speeds up the process without sacrificing precision.

1. Navigate to Pairwise: After allocating your budget in the Main UI, access Pairwise to start rating and ranking projects.

2. Rate and Rank Projects: Use star ratings to categorize projects and the pairwise system to establish fine-tuned preferences. Customize your view to focus on specific details and flag any projects with conflicts of interest.

3. Unlock Your Ballot: Once satisfied with your rankings, confirm to unlock your ballot and head back to the Main UI to finalize your vote.

With the support of Optimism, Pairwise is evolving to become a key tool in community-driven funding. By focusing on badgeholders in RF5, we aim to capture high-quality insights that help prioritize the best projects for Optimism’s Superchain.

Let’s make Retro Funding 5 the most impactful round yet! 💪

Pairwise has also introduced pseudonymous voting on Retro Funding to enhance voter privacy and reduce peer pressure. This allows for more genuine expression of opinions. For more information on this feature, you can refer to this post.

During Retro Funding 4 (RF4), Pairwise conducted a community signaling experiment where we divided the 230 projects into 11 categories and incentivized the wider community to engage with the Pairwise dapp. We divided up the voters into four different stakeholder groups: Recipients, $OP Holders, Badgeholders & Delegates. Recipients didn’t have adequate engagement as the addresses we had for recipients were derived from Farcaster and deployment addresses, which ended up with most recipients being unable to vote with their expected addresses.

Here is a breakdown of the engagement observed by the 3 different stakeholder groups:

Despite being a community experiment and knowing that the whole process of voting on categories takes time, some folks were excited to jump on it, play and discover cool projects. You can view the results here.

To get these results we used the Budget Box algorithm to rank the projects in each category by every user and the aggregation algorithm to determine the final rank of every project. To assign the OP amount for each rank, we used the same OP distribution as the final results of the official RF4 round, e.g. the 18th place project in Pairwise gets the amount of OP that the 18th place project got in RF4.

We can see how the different stakeholder groups voted and it's very interesting to see how the three different stakeholder groups assessed RF4. 

When comparing with the official RF4 metrics experiment, it is most appropriate to use the Badgeholders results. It is of course worth repeating, while the over 100 badgeholders voted in the official RF4 vote, in Pairwise only pool of voters aren't the same.

The first thing we can observe is how Zora and Layer 3 were given markedly less OP, each lost over 350k OP. On the other hand Aerodrome and Velodrome Finance were given markedly more OP, more than 220k each.

In general, wallets, privacy dapps and governance projects performed better on Pairwise than in the purely metric based round and meme coins and DeFi projects with relatively lower metrics performed significatively worse. Most notably, Ambire, Aragon, Umbra, Beam, ZKP2P & zkBob smart contract privacy wallet were all ranked over 130 positions higher with Pairwise, while Gloom, Ionic Protocol, fxhash, sudoswap, Catalog Radio, Overnight Finance, Orderly Network, Gamma, OpenOcean, Harvest Finance, & Lido Finance were all ranked over 80 positions lower with Pairwise. Likely Lido was given a lower score due to its dominance in the staking ecosystem, and Gamma potentially because of their recent exploit.

For a deeper analysis of Pairwise allocations compared to the official RF4 allocations check our https://www.pairwise.vote/rf4-results

Thank you to everyone who participated in this experiment. Your engagement and feedback have been crucial in shaping Pairwise. 🤗

Stay tuned for updates and new features that will make participating in Retro Funding even more rewarding!

Communities are made of people like you and me. Often, public votes are swayed by peer pressure and social norms, making it hard to express genuine opinions. This was clear from the feedback we received during RetroPGF 3—many badgeholders were uneasy about making their detailed voting preferences public in lists. That’s why we made it a priority to ensure that Pairwise allows for anonymous voting, letting you express your views without any fear of judgment.

Removing the fear of attribution allows information to be truly free.

Our goal for this new iteration of Pairwise was to do on-chain voting, allow voters to be anonymous, and make a fun user experience. True anonymity was not possible while maintaining on-chain voting, so we made it pseudonymous instead.

Here is how we did it:
1. Voters log in with traditional web2 login methods to create an AA wallet (via Thirdweb) 

2. The voters then can connect this new AA wallet to their existing OP mainnet address which holds their Superchain reputation using a zk proof (via Semaphore group managed by Bandada). 

3. The OP mainnet address is never used again and the voter uses their AA wallet to create votes as attestations (via EAS), and to maintain anonymity, we sponsor the transactions. 

The zk tech, to be specific, “the semaphore group” of users’ anonymous identities is what makes the Pairwise experience anonymous and the AA wallet experience is what makes the voting experience so magical. ✨

To give you a clearer picture, let’s talk about the components of Pairwise that make the magic happen. The frontend Dapp has been built with Next.js and backend services in Node.js with express. Major components of the Dapp include:

1. Login 

   1. The Pairwise Dapp allows users to login with a social account using Thirdweb SDK (step 1a). 

   2. This creates a unique Smart Contract Wallet (SCW) for each user (step 1b) and we save the SCW Address for the user in our postgreSQL database.

2. Connect 

   1. Next, users can connect to their wallet (step 2a) which is publicly associated with them. In the current RetroFunding Round, we suggest users to connect to the wallet which holds their OP tokens and/or reputation (delegate address, badgeholder address or recipient address). 

   2. We then take the user’s wallet address (step 2b) and invoke the backend service for collecting voting power (step 3) for the user's wallet. As part of this, we search (step 4) the voting snapshot csv file (before the voting begins we took a snapshot of the wallet state for OP token holders, delegates, badgeholders and recipients and saved it as this snapshot csv file) and find all the badges held by the wallet. We made some rules to avoid deanonymizing the wallets based on holding too many badges. 

   3. Based on these we save (step 5) by mapping the user’s voting power (as collection of badges) against their SCW address. Currently, we save the user's main wallet address as well to validate our results. In the future, we plan to go fully pseudonymous. 

3. Vote

   1. To vote, the user filters the projects in the Dapp and then ranks the filtered projects and categories. Next, the final ranked projects across all categories are saved in IPFS and we use this IPFS url as the voting signal from the user. 

   2. We generate proof of vote using Semaphore library against this IPFS url (step 8a) and then we save the IPFS url and nullifier (a unique random string for each user to denote non-repeatable participation in voting) from the semaphore proof results into supabase db (step 8b). 

   3. Finally, we use Ethereum Attestation Service (EAS) to submit an on-chain vote as an attestation (step 8c). The attestation contains the proof and IPFS url as well. 
      

   So What’s Next ?

   In all future versions, we will enable 100% pseudonymous voting by only keeping the SCW address and SemaphoreID in the postgreSQL, and keep the SemaphoreID, BadgeList, and IPFS URL in the Supabase.

   

   Furthermore, in future versions, we believe we can enable delegation by simply allowing the user wallet to be a delegate’s wallet. We are also currently investigating if a liquid democracy implementation is possible, where voters can delegate on a per category basis, as well as have pass through delegation if a voter’s delegate, delegates as opposed to voting themselves.
   
   The RF4 version of Pairwise was an epic undertaking, the anonymity piece which I architected is only a small part of it. We had major contributions from the entire General Magic team, especially Griff, Zeptimus, Mahdi, Alireza, Moenick, Lovel, Marko, Ayaz, Maryjaf, Kay, MoeShehab, Stee, Anamaria, Guil, Kristina, Aubree, constant support from Bandada Team: Vivian, Andy and the many members of the Giveth and Optimism community that gave us feedback on the application as it was being developed!

With a fresh approach to voting for Retro Funding, Pairwise transforms the experience into something simple, engaging, and fun. 

This community experiment invites Delegates, Token holders, Recipients, and Badgeholders to use Pairwise to express their preferences in a new and meaningful way.

Pairwise is a decentralized app (DApp) designed for the Optimism ecosystem. It lets stakeholders signal how they think funds should be distributed to various projects involved in Retro Funding.

Our main goals are to expand the reviewer base and boost the impact of funded projects. We aim to make the work of these projects more visible to a broader audience, not just the current badgeholders. This exposure ensures that valuable projects get the recognition they deserve from a wider community. Additionally, by comparing the community's choices with official decisions, we deepen our understanding of how Pairwise is used and its effectiveness.

Using Pairwise, we strive to make the funding process more transparent and inclusive, allowing more people to have a say in important decisions. This approach helps ensure that diverse perspectives contribute to shaping the Optimism ecosystem.

Everyone is invited to join Pairwise, and if you’re a badgeholder, delegate, recipient, or token holder, you have voting power. Once you log in, you'll be creating an account abstracted address where you can connect your voting power and receive badges based on your role. 

1. Login and Connectivity: Start by tapping 'play' and log in with your preferred method. Connect your wallet once to gather your voting power—this session will be saved for ease of use on any device, at any time.

2. Collect Voting Power: You can collect your voting power from any addresses you hold and you will be attesting with the first account, protecting your identity using zk-tech.

3. Select a category: Choose a category where you have most expertise in.

4. Filtering Phase: Use this phase to choose which projects you want to move forward to the ranking phase. It's your opportunity to learn about the projects, filter out the noise and focus on what truly matters.

5. Start Ranking: Compare two projects at a time from your curated list and decide which one had more impact. This pairwise comparison helps in organizing your thoughts and preferences systematically.

6. Preview and Edit Your Rankings: Before finalizing your input, preview the ranked list of your top projects. Edit this list by dragging and dropping projects to better reflect your preferences.

7. Submit Your Vote: Once satisfied with your rankings, leave a pseudonymous comment if you wish, and submit your vote.

8. Review and Compare Categories: After ranking projects within a category, you'll be prompted to compare this category with others you’ve evaluated. This step helps identify which categories overall contain the more impactful projects.

Curious to see how Pairwise will revolutionize Retro Funding? 

Together with our friends from Unitap we've prepared a detailed video explainer that walks you through the functionalities of Pairwise and how it integrates with the Optimism Retro Funding.

All voting decisions and feedback are shared pseudonymously via attestation. Your identity is safeguarded throughout the process, providing peace of mind that your opinions are expressed freely and without any bias.

Every category you complete on Pairwise will directly affect the final results and also earns you points towards a special raffle. There are four different buckets, one for each stakeholder group, with 1000 OP tokens each allocated for 40 total winners. The more you participate, the better your chances of winning! 

Dive deep into the rules by reading this forum post.

Pairwise makes it easy for your voice to be heard and significantly contributes to the collective decision-making process within the Optimism ecosystem

Join us now at pairwise.vote and be part of redefining how community preferences shape the Optimism ecosystem.

Let’s make Retro Funding more democratic, together! ✨🔴

**While Pairwise offers a fresh perspective on community preferences, remember it’s experimental. The insights we gather are for learning and won't directly decide the funding outcomes.

Our Story

Incubated at General Magic , Pairwise is our humble attempt to refine digital democracy. We all know the issues that DAOs and projects face around voter fatigue and lack of participation. Our goal with Pairwise is to make voting fun again!

Pairwise is launching in June 2024! Our first use case will be to allow badgeholders, delegates and the wider OP community to signal their preferences on projects they're passionate about that they'd like to see receive Retro Funding.

The first version of our platform will:

🔍 Allow users to discover projects in the OP ecosystem and filter by categories

🗳 Vote on projects they're passionate about in a FUN way

🤑 Reward contributors with $OP

Ready to join us on this new voting journey?

• Follow up on X and Farcaster

• Subscribe to our newsletter here 🙏

Let's make voting fun again!