RPIP-4 Ambiguity Resolution Vote Text Proofreading
Who is the proposed retrospective award recipient?
What specific project or work is the retrospective award in recognition of? Please detail what the project or work entailed and the duration over which it took place.
For proof-reading the vote text created by @Valdorff [here].
More specifically, for identifying the issue of the implementation PR links being incorrect, as described in discord [here], when it had been missed by everyone else up to that point. The issue was fixed [here].
This deserves recognition due to the potential for this mistake to require a revote if it was discovered after the vote text was made live on snapshot. Governance in Rocket Pool is already effectively blocked by this issue, a situation which is already causing frustration. A revote could potentially have blocked governance for an additional 2 weeks.
Are the subjects of this award entirely open source (MIT, GPL, Apache, CC BY license or similar)? If not, which parts will not be, why, and under what license will they be published?
N/A
Benefits - enter N/A where appropriate
How did the project or work for which the retrospective award would be given help people looking to stake ETH for rETH?
N/A
How did the project or work for which the retrospective award would be given help rETH holders?
N/A
How did the project or work for which the retrospective award would be given help people looking to run a Rocket Pool node for the first time?
N/A
How did the project or work for which the retrospective award would be given help people already running a Rocket Pool node?
N/A
How did the project or work for which the retrospective award would be given how does this help the Rocket Pool community?
Prevention of further governance deadlock as detailed above.
How did the project or work for which the retrospective award would be given how does this help RPL holders?
Prevention of further governance deadlock as detailed above.
Payment
How much USD $ is the applicant requesting be awarded to the recipient?
I’ve no strong opinion on an exact number. Perhaps in the range of $50 - $500.
A higher award amount would better incentivise engagement with governance operation, even in cases where the topic is very meta. The potential negative impact of making this mistake could also have been quite high, which implies a higher amount.
A lower award amount is perhaps more appropriate given that the actual effort / time spent was quite low, and because spotting mistakes like this when you’re not specifically looking for them is a little like a roll of the dice.
Conflict of Interest
Does the person or persons requesting the retrospective award have any conflicts of interest to disclose? (Please disclose here if you are a member of the GMC or if you have nominated a member of the GMC for this retrospective award).
Nothing financial.
I’m one of the people that failed to spot the error. One could argue that I’m partially motivated to propose the retro to make up for having missed it, and would feel less embarrassed for having done so if some good came out of it.