My trail of thinking is that increased end-contributor conversion rates => more community funding => solves customer pain point (wanting to fund what matters in your DAO/ecosystem).
I’ll name that having to make these types of priority tradeoffs is foreign to me. With the 0 to 1 builds that I work on with Carl, Raid Guild, or I do myself, it takes a couple days to do a steel thread of a feature like this. With QuadraticLenster, Raid Guild put the match estimates into the UI + it took roughly a day to do from conception to implementation. Our work isn’t perfect, but it gets us to data about what affects the customer UX very fast. There are probably trade-offs to taking the approach I just articulated that I’m not fully articulating also (maybe our code is less maintainable over time, documentation is lacking, 80/20 work isnt possible/desirable/responsible in some cases, etc), so please don’t interpret this is “you should do it our way”. I’m just naming that when you’re doing dev work in a more 0 to 1 way, you just dont have to make these kinds of priority trade offs because you’ve got an abundance of resources (time/dev cycles/design spaces) fitting multi day projects into a quarter, instead of a scarcity of resources because you’re trying to fit multi week projects into a quarter.
I’ve not seen the prioritized list of customer pain points nor the thinking about self-serve adoption (though I have dogfooded the product and my dogfooding accounts for half of the self serve adoption so far), you are closer to the data/customer/GS team these days, and my advocating for this feature has always been consider feedback, so while I’m disappointed to see the feature deprioritized because it feels like an easy/obvious win to me, I trust your judgement to prioritize Grants Stack work as you see fit.