Thanks for that retraction @Taliskye; and it’s totally understandable.
Sometimes the PTBR is missing important context, so it’s good to have Q&A to surface it.
I want to highlight a few other things:
- Deploying to new chains is an engineering task, and one we’re well equipped for! We rely on the partner chain and PoolTime to push out marketing messages.
- Integrating new yield sources is another engineering lift. The bulk of the work is in determining technical feasibility and building (potentially). As we have with Moonwell, we rely on PoolTime and the yield source themselves to broadcast news of the integration.
- Co-Marketing Campaigns. This point is really an aspect of the previous ones; that we’ll record a playbook of what we executed with the partner and the PoolTime team.
So you can see that by no means is Tim handling all of that 
Regarding the Metrics
We chose Prize Pool Contributions (PPC) as the number one metric to shoot for. This is because it is the most direct measure of the increase in prizes; which is all that we care about.
PPC is more important than TVL and APR, because at the end of the day all that matters is how much the prizes increased.
In fact, PPC is also more important than measuring yield: the NFT Sweepstakes campaigns will be directly funded by wallets and other projects. There is no yield; they are contributing funds directly.
In this way, PPC is the best metric because it affords us creativity in how we think about growing PoolTogether.
Regarding Past Deliverables
PTBR-2 deliverables:
- Completion of audit mitigations.
- Bots and other supporting infrastructure
- Launch marketing communications & graphics
- Launch on 4 chains
We delivered the first three, but decided to instead first launch a “beta” on one chain. This was a decision we made after discussions on the council calls. Due to the complexity of the protocol we wanted to soft-launch and focus on one chain to minimize the impact of any possible issues. I posted an update to the community to make sure everyone was in the loop.
PTBR-7 deliverables:
- Production launch on Optimism
- Token Branding + Brand Identity Kit + App Design Kit
- Rewards app
- Flash liquidation (for AMM integration)
- RocketPool integration
The first four were delivered. RocketPool began work on the integration, but they became busy and are only now completing the audit mitigations on their code. It’s an externality that is hard for us to control.
In mid-December, the Optimism launch was discovered to have an issue that wasn’t caught by either of the two audits or the beta launch. The Aave vaults were severely limiting how much users could deposit, so the protocol was unable to scale. This bug made it through many rounds of checks; and it shows how no audit is a silver bullet. It proved that the beta was a good idea, though it didn’t catch the issue. We do the best we can.
PTBR-15 deliverables:
- Improvements to prize adjustment algorithm
- Fix for the aforementioned issue
- Localize RNG (Witnet)
- Prize Pool launch script
- Launch on Op, Arb, Base and Ethereum.
- Buyback and burn mechanism
- Migration app for old versions
We are going to deploy to Ethereum in the next few weeks, which means that we’ve delivered on everything with the notable exception of the buyback and burn.
Instead of the buyback and burn, we delivered POOL staking because everyone wanted it instead. We made this change based on overwhelming community feedback.
Takeaways
In the few instances that we changed the deliverables, we did so because of feedback from the community.
We had a problem with the first Optimism launch, but issues can happen with any protocol (see Euler V1 with its dozen audits).
Otherwise, we’ve delivered on everything we’ve promised and have gone above and beyond wherever possible to deliver more value.
I hope this additional context shows you that we are acting in good faith and doing our best to make this protocol awesome.