Public Goods Network Retrospective & Recommendation - Discussion

UPDATE: No fault proofs does not mean money is stuck. We are actively working with key stakeholders to ensure the safety of ALL funds on the network.


There’s been a lot of discussion about the future of PGN. We recommend that further questions and conversations about a possible transition move to the Gitcoin forum so that the decision-makers and related community can be involved.

This post is to provide a space for these discussions to occur.

Summary of Public Goods Network Retrospective & Recommendation

@enidavis shared her learnings and recommendations for continuing the network wind down here on the Gitcoin forum. Please read this entire post BEFORE offering future plan suggestions.

Quick summary of post:

  • Key Learnings from Running PGN
  • Criteria Needed for Future Success
  • Wind Down Plan and Asset Migration

Ultimately, @enidavis and my priorities are protecting the users who trusted us with PGN. If there is a transition to a new team, we owe it to the community to ensure that all of the listed criteria are met before green-lighting a transition. If there is a wind-down, it is only fair that we are transparent about the exact shutdown date and the risks associated with spinning down the network in its current state.

Prepparing for a Successful Wind Down

Please note that:

However, we are currently exploring options to extend the wind-down date past June, and we do not intend to shut down the chain until 99% of assets are bridged off the network. It is my personal recommendation that we renew our RaaS contract for an extra 12 months to prevent the loss of funds.

The current state of infrastructure makes the shutdown of PGN difficult and painful for users. I cannot stand behind the current shutdown date in good faith, knowing that ~$1.35 million worth of assets from our community is still stuck on our chain.

The cost to pay Conduit, our RaaS provider, to extend PGN for another year is ~$70k ($36k for RaaS fees + $30k in DA fees in the bear case that we are not profitable). I’m amazed by the communities’ abilities to rally together and come up with the funds to maintain the network. Over the past few months, I’ve been involved in many discussions and have seen a ton of momentum to revive the network. I appreciate the commitment from strong teams, prospective funders, and dedicated individuals who offered clear guidelines for a path forward. However, neither Nicole nor I are the final decision-makers on this matter.

I would appreciate any clarity on who decides next steps. I would also urge decision makers to fully understand the risks associated with shutting down at the current proposed date.

Transition Plans

I understand the concerns of an unsuccessful transition. And I fully agree with @enidavis that there are a lot of criteria needed to ensure a successful future (ie liquidity, dedicated team, killer app, etc). However, the downsides of shutting down this June far outweigh the downsides of a mediocre transition plan.

Since the announcement of the spin down of PGN in mid January, we’ve had many interested players with strong social and financial capital propose plans to transition the network. These conversations are still occurring nearly 4 months later. It’s a waste of our time and energy to beat around the bush and slowly let this bleed. Let’s make a decision.

As it stands right now, there is an interested party with the funds and approval from Conduit to pay for/maintain the network for a guaranteed 12 months. Our options are:

  1. Say no and continue with June shutdown date.
  2. Say no and Gitcoin Foundation pays for an extended shut down date.
  3. Say yes and allow a new party to bear the costs/responsibilities of running PGN.

Again, I sincerely appreciate everyone who has dedicated their time, energy, and resources into this experiment. I care deeply about the community PGN brought together. I remain committed to the mission of this network and hope its goals can one day be realized.

In the spirit of transparency, if you have thoughts, opinions, or suggestions, please post them publicly here.

For any users who need support in bridging their funds off the network, reach out on our Telegram, where Nicole and I would be more than happy to assist you.


Not sure who has decision rights here (Foundation, or Stewards)… but I am in favor of this direction (shutting down PGN) unless a proposal emerges that has a credible* plan to success for PGN.

If that happens, I could be swayed in this direction:

*The word “credible” is doing a lot of work here :slight_smile:

What does credible look like to me?

  1. Financial backing - who is going to pay for it?
  2. Team - who is going to make it successful? What combination of skillsets + how much time as they dedicating to make it happen?
  3. USP - what is the USP? Dont say “digital schelling point for public goods”. I want to know specifically why builders will deploy here and why users will bridge.
  4. Why will this succeed when the first PGN experiment failed?
  5. What do you need from Gitcoin?

It is easy to LARP about resurrecting PGN, but actually doing it + doing it well will take a lot of work. I’d welcome any credible proposals. If none emerges in the next 2 weeks I think PGN should shutdown in June as planned.


To clarify, you are in favor of the June shutdown date? How do you propose we go about freezing/burning all the remaining assets? What are the legal implications of doing so?

These are the conversations we’ve been having with Optimism and Conduit over the past few months. I do not think people fully understand the grasp for how serious of a decision this is.

Agreed. Nicole and I have the most exposure to what it takes to successfully transition PGN and have outlined the necessary criteria in detail. Again, I’m not asking to green light a transition without a credible plan, rather my ask is to simply extend the shutdown date.

I foresee that in the future there will be more zombie chains who are in the same boat, better infra, and significantly improved interoperability that will make the wind down of a chain a lot more feasible than it is in this current state.

1 Like

why are they stuck on the chain? i thought the whole point of L2s was that users can withdraw your assets even if the chain disappears because the DA on the main chain allows users to withdraw their assets.

if thats not the case, why do we pay the ETH mainnet (and later, celestia) for DA? we paid $100k/mo for many months for DA. if that wasnt buying us the property of tokens being recoverable on the main chain, we should have just launched this as a side chain not a rollup.

yes, unless a credible plan to revive it is created.

i do not know why i as a steward would be responsible for answering those questions.

i was under the impression that the team that administered PGN would have had a plan for an orderly shutdown.

in the PGN wind down post from january, targeting a June wind down, Kyle said “. We will offer more details as we get closer to that timeline.”. Is this post the “more details”? this post seems like mostly just an ask for more funding and more burn from Gitcoin, too little too late.

it looks like from the foundation budget, that the PGN team was staffed for several months after the shutdown. what was that time/funding used for if not drawing up a plan for an orderly shutdown in june? what has the PGN team been up to for the last 4 months?

if i were to support this option, why would i have any confidence that the situation would improve after a year and spending $70k?

given we had 4 months to execute an orderly shutdown with paid staff and did not, why would 12 months to execute an orderly shutdown without any staff do any better? is conduit going to commit to upgrading the infrastructure to allow people to exit the chain without the chain being up between now and june 2025? if not, what is the plan to get peoples tokens off the chain between now and june 2025 in this scenario?

tldr - i think we need a credible path to winding down gitcoin’s financial commitment to PGN. sooner is better than later, gitcoin does not have infinite money to spend our way out of this.

1 Like

+1 to this.

I love the spirit of PGN and what it represents but it it needs a massive amount of financing and time and people and all three at the same time.

Gitcoin is still focused on Public Goods. What Gitcoin does it’s very much a public good given they are facilitating the quarterly funding of thousands of open source projects.

And importantly anyone can run a round on grant stack now! That really has become the focus and for good reason because of the network effects that unleashes for potential public goods.

But taking on running a network is a massive project and a very different one from building Grant Stack and Allo and running quarterly rounds for the community.

I love the idea of the community taking over PGN and running it! :woman_singer:t3: I’m just not sure the scope and scale of the project are being genuinely considered.


Reviving the Public Goods Network: A Grassroots-Driven Campaign

Reviving the Public Goods Network (PGN) requires a concerted effort to engage stakeholders, foster collaboration, and drive activity on the blockchain.

Understanding the Challenges:
PGN, like many blockchain networks, faces challenges in maintaining momentum and relevance amidst evolving technological landscapes and shifting priorities. Previous initiatives may have encountered obstacles or failed to gain traction due to factors such as lack of awareness, limited resources, or competing interests. However, these challenges present opportunities for innovation and renewal, and with the right approach, PGN can regain its momentum and fulfill its potential as a catalyst for public goods development.

The Importance of Public Goods Network:
PGN serves as a vital network for fostering collaboration, mobilizing resources, and promoting innovation in the realm of public goods development.

Advantages of Public Goods Network:

  1. Collaborative Environment: PGN fosters a collaborative environment where builders can work together to address shared challenges and opportunities. By facilitating cross-disciplinary collaboration and knowledge sharing, PGN enables builders to leverage their collective expertise and resources to drive innovation and progress.

  2. Resource Mobilization: PGN’s ability to mobilize resources, including funding, expertise, and technology, is a major advantage for builders. By providing a transparent framework for grant-making and access to a diverse pool of resources, PGN empowers builders to scale their projects more effectively and maximize their impact on society.

  3. Focus on Climate Tech Initiatives: PGN’s emphasis on grants in climate tech initiatives is particularly attractive to builders seeking to address pressing environmental challenges. By providing funding and support for projects aimed at mitigating and adapting to climate change, PGN incentivizes builders to participate in the network and contribute their expertise to the collective effort.

  4. Reduced Competition for Sequencer Fees: Unlike other blockchain networks where competition for sequencer fees is intense, PGN offers a more equitable environment for builders. By prioritizing projects based on their impact and alignment with public goods objectives, PGN reduces the pressure on builders to compete for fees, allowing them to focus on creating value for the community.

  5. Stability and Certainty: PGN provides stability and certainty in an uncertain world, giving builders confidence in the long-term viability of their initiatives. Unlike other platforms where future developments may be uncertain, PGN offers a reliable framework for project deployment and development, providing a solid foundation for builders to build upon.

The Grassroots-Driven Campaign:
To revitalize PGN and bring activity to the blockchain, a grassroots-driven campaign needs to be launched with the following key components:

  1. Community Engagement: Engage with existing and potential members of the PGN community through targeted outreach, educational initiatives, and community events. By fostering a sense of belonging and purpose, we can cultivate a vibrant and engaged community that is committed to the mission of public goods development.

  2. Partnership Development: Forge strategic partnerships with organizations, institutions, and initiatives aligned with the goals of PGN. By leveraging the collective resources and networks of our partners, we can amplify our impact and reach new audiences, driving greater participation and collaboration on the platform.

  3. Campaign Messaging: Develop a compelling narrative and messaging strategy that highlights the importance of PGN in addressing global challenges and promoting positive change. By articulating the value proposition of PGN in clear and accessible terms, we can attract builders and supporters who resonate with our mission and vision.

  4. Grants and Incentives: Launch grant programs and incentive mechanisms to support builders and projects on the PGN blockchain. By providing funding, mentorship, and recognition for impactful initiatives, we can incentivize participation and drive activity on the blockchain, catalyzing innovation and progress in public goods development.

  5. Educational Resources: Provide educational resources, workshops, and tutorials to empower builders with the knowledge and skills they need to succeed on the PGN blockchain. By equipping builders with the tools and information they need to navigate the blockchain ecosystem, we can lower barriers to entry and foster a culture of learning and experimentation.

Reviving the Public Goods Network through a grassroots-driven campaign requires a multi-faceted approach that engages stakeholders, promotes collaboration, and drives activity on the blockchain. By leveraging PGN’s unique advantages, including its collaborative environment, resource mobilization capabilities, focus on climate tech initiatives, reduced competition for sequencer fees, and stability, we can attract builders and promote public goods development for the benefit of society.

Integration with Other Platforms and Blockchains:
In addition to leveraging its unique advantages, Public Goods Network (PGN) can collaborate with other social media platforms and blockchains to amplify its impact and support public goods development. Platforms such as Warpcast and blockchains like Optimism and Base offer complementary capabilities and resources that can enhance the effectiveness of PGN and contribute to its revival.

1. Warpcast Integration:
Warpcast, a social media platform focused on community-driven content and discussions, can serve as a powerful tool for engaging with stakeholders and promoting public goods initiatives. By integrating with Warpcast, PGN can leverage its user base and engagement features to amplify its messaging and reach new audiences. Warpcast users can discover and participate in PGN projects, share updates and insights, and contribute to discussions around public goods development, fostering a sense of community and collaboration.

2. Collaboration with Optimism and Base:
Optimism and Base, prominent blockchain networks known for their scalability and developer-friendly features, offer opportunities for collaboration and integration with PGN. Optimism, in particular, has developed the Open Source OP Stack, a retroactive public funding mechanism that incentivizes contributions to open source projects. By leveraging the OP Stack, PGN can create additional incentives for builders and contributors, encouraging participation and accelerating the development of public goods initiatives.

3. Cross-Platform Synergy:
The integration of PGN with Warpcast, Optimism, and Base creates a synergistic ecosystem where builders, contributors, and supporters can collaborate seamlessly across platforms. Builders can showcase their projects on Warpcast, receive funding and support through PGN grants, and leverage the scalability and efficiency of Optimism and Base for project deployment and execution. Contributors can engage with projects, provide feedback and assistance, and earn rewards through the OP Stack, incentivizing active participation and contribution to the public goods ecosystem.

4. Retroactive Public Funding Mechanism:
The retroactive public funding mechanism offered by Optimism’s OP Stack further enhances the value proposition of PGN by providing builders with additional incentives and rewards for their contributions. By aligning incentives with outcomes and recognizing contributions retroactively, the OP Stack incentivizes sustained engagement and investment in public goods development, driving continuous innovation and progress on the PGN blockchain.

By integrating with Warpcast and collaborating with blockchains like Optimism and Base, Public Goods Network can create a vibrant and interconnected ecosystem that fosters collaboration, innovation, and progress in public goods development. Through cross-platform synergy and the implementation of retroactive public funding mechanisms, PGN can attract builders and contributors, mobilize resources, and accelerate the development of impactful initiatives for the benefit of society. Together, these partnerships and initiatives contribute to the revival and revitalization of PGN as a leading blockchain for public goods development in the digital age.

The Missing Element in the Gitcoin Grants Ecosystem:

In the Gitcoin Grants ecosystem, the absence of a third option for hosting grant rounds on a blockchain that contributes towards retroactive Public Goods Funding (PGF) on Optimism represents a significant gap in the platform’s offerings. While Gitcoin Grants provides a valuable platform for crowdfunding public goods projects, the choice to host grant rounds exclusively on Arbitrum without considering alternatives poses a disadvantage in terms of accessing further funding through retroactive rewards.

Understanding Retroactive Funding:

Retroactive funding, facilitated by Optimism’s Open Source OP Stack technology, introduces a novel mechanism for incentivizing contributions to open source projects. Through the “Law of Chains,” a protocol-level agreement signed by other blockchains utilizing the OP Stack, a portion of their sequencer fees is allocated back to Optimism for retroactive funding. This creates a continuous stream of funding that rewards past contributions to open source projects retroactively, aligning incentives and encouraging sustained engagement and investment in the ecosystem.

The Disadvantage of Choosing Arbitrum Exclusively:

By choosing to host grant rounds exclusively on Arbitrum, Gitcoin Grants misses out on the opportunity to leverage retroactive funding mechanisms available through Optimism’s OP Stack. While Arbitrum offers scalability and efficiency benefits, its decision to not participate in retroactive funding agreements limits the potential for further funding through the Law of Chains. This poses a disadvantage to projects hosted on Gitcoin Grants, as they may not benefit from retroactive rewards for their past contributions to the ecosystem.

It’s important to note that Gitcoin Grants’ decision to host grant rounds on Arbitrum is likely driven by considerations such as network capabilities, user preferences, and technical compatibility. Without being overly critical, it’s essential to recognize that different blockchains have their strengths and limitations, and the choice of hosting platform involves trade-offs and considerations beyond retroactive funding mechanisms.

To address this gap in the Gitcoin Grants ecosystem, exploring alternative hosting options that support retroactive funding mechanisms, such as Optimism’s OP Stack, could be beneficial. This could involve collaborating with Optimism or exploring interoperability solutions that enable Gitcoin Grants to leverage retroactive funding benefits while still utilizing the scalability and efficiency advantages of Arbitrum.

The absence of a third option for hosting grant rounds on a blockchain that contributes towards retroactive PGF on Optimism represents a key missing element in the Gitcoin Grants ecosystem. While Arbitrum offers its advantages, the decision to exclusively host grant rounds on this platform limits access to further funding through retroactive rewards. Exploring alternative hosting options that support retroactive funding mechanisms could enhance the effectiveness and sustainability of Gitcoin Grants, ultimately benefiting the entire ecosystem of public goods development.

Harnessing the Power of Warpcast for Community Impact:

Our next steps with the community are poised to make a significant impact, driven by the newly created Warpcast channel dedicated to the Public Goods Network (PGN). This strategic move marks a pivotal moment in our efforts to spread awareness and foster collaboration across social graphs within the Superchain user groups. By leveraging Warpcast’s capabilities, we aim to attract builders and stakeholders who are eager to contribute to the PGN ecosystem and develop integrations that enhance its functionality and reach.

1. Spreading Awareness:
The Warpcast channel dedicated to PGN serves as a central hub for spreading awareness and promoting engagement with the platform. Through targeted messaging and community outreach efforts, we aim to educate users within the Superchain user groups about the importance and potential of PGN in driving positive change through public goods development. By leveraging Warpcast’s social graph integration, we can reach a broader audience and spark interest among individuals and organizations looking to make a difference.

2. Fostering Collaboration:
Warpcast’s community-centric features provide an ideal environment for fostering collaboration and dialogue among members of the PGN community. Through discussions, polls, and interactive content, we can facilitate meaningful interactions and exchange ideas that drive innovation and progress within the ecosystem. By creating a space where builders, developers, and enthusiasts can connect and collaborate, we lay the foundation for future integrations and initiatives that enhance the functionality and impact of PGN.

3. Attracting Integrations with PGN:
As awareness of PGN grows within the Superchain user groups, we anticipate an increase in interest from developers and projects looking to integrate with the platform. By showcasing the benefits and opportunities associated with building on PGN through Warpcast channels, we can attract a diverse range of integrations that enhance its functionality and utility. Whether it’s building tools, applications, or services that leverage PGN’s capabilities, the potential for collaboration and innovation is limitless.

4. Driving Impactful Initiatives:
Through the combined efforts of the PGN community and Warpcast’s platform, we aim to drive impactful initiatives that contribute to the common good. By harnessing the collective expertise, resources, and creativity of our members, we can tackle pressing global challenges and make a meaningful difference in the world. Whether it’s supporting climate tech projects, promoting healthcare access, or addressing social inequality, the collaborative spirit of Warpcast and PGN empowers us to drive positive change at scale.

The new Warpcast channel dedicated to the Public Goods Network represents a significant opportunity to drive community impact and foster collaboration within the Superchain user groups.

Empowering the Community: Transitioning Public Goods Network from Gitcoin

The introduction of incentives and rewards within the Public Goods Network (PGN) ecosystem presents a transformative opportunity to transition ownership and governance into the hands of the community. By leveraging the unique capabilities and mechanisms offered by PGN, we can empower users to take ownership of the platform’s development, funding, and decision-making processes, gradually shifting away from reliance on Gitcoin and towards a more community-driven model.

1. Incentivizing Participation:
By implementing incentives and rewards within PGN, we can incentivize active participation and engagement from community members. Whether through grants, bounties, or token-based rewards, these incentives encourage users to contribute their time, expertise, and resources towards the growth and development of the platform. As participation increases, so too does the sense of ownership and investment in the success of PGN as a collective endeavor.

2. Fostering Governance:
As participation and engagement within the community grow, so too does the need for effective governance structures to guide decision-making and resource allocation within PGN. By implementing decentralized governance mechanisms, such as DAOs (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations) or community voting systems, we can empower users to have a direct say in the direction and priorities of the platform. This fosters a sense of ownership and accountability, as decisions are made collectively by the community rather than by a centralized authority.

3. Transitioning Funding:
One of the key aspects of transitioning PGN into the community’s hands involves shifting funding mechanisms away from reliance on external platforms like Gitcoin towards self-sustaining models. By leveraging retroactive funding mechanisms, such as those facilitated by Optimism’s OP Stack, PGN can generate a continuous stream of funding that rewards past contributions and incentivizes ongoing engagement within the ecosystem. This enables PGN to become more self-sufficient and less reliant on external funding sources over time.

4. Cultivating Community-Led Initiatives:
With ownership and governance firmly in the hands of the community, PGN can begin to cultivate and support community-led initiatives that align with the platform’s mission and values. Whether it’s supporting grassroots projects, promoting local initiatives, or funding innovative solutions to pressing global challenges, PGN can serve as a platform for community-driven innovation and impact. By providing the necessary resources and support, PGN empowers users to drive positive change within their own communities and beyond.

5. Building a Sustainable Ecosystem:
Ultimately, the transition of PGN into the community’s hands from Gitcoin is about building a sustainable ecosystem that is owned, governed, and driven by its users. By incentivizing participation, fostering governance, transitioning funding mechanisms, and supporting community-led initiatives, PGN can become a self-sustaining platform that continues to thrive and grow over time. Through collective action and collaboration, the community can shape the future of PGN and ensure that it remains a valuable resource for public goods development for years to come.

The introduction of incentives and rewards within the Public Goods Network presents a unique opportunity to transition ownership and governance into the hands of the community. By empowering users to participate, govern, and fund initiatives within the platform, PGN can become a truly community-driven ecosystem that is sustainable, resilient, and impactful.

Leveraging Fractal Visions’ NFT Marketplace for Impact Concentration:

Fractal Visions, with its innovative NFT marketplace, is poised to play a pivotal role in concentrating focus on impact makers within the ecosystem of the Superchain, particularly if the Public Goods Network (PGN) continues to operate alongside our efforts to support builders and creators. By harnessing the capabilities of Fractal Visions’ platform and integrating it with PGN initiatives, we can create synergies that amplify the impact of community-driven projects and initiatives on Optimism and Base Blockchain networks.

1. Identifying Impact Makers:
Fractal Visions’ NFT marketplace provides a unique opportunity to identify and highlight impact makers within the Superchain ecosystem. Through curated collections, featured listings, and community-driven curation mechanisms, Fractal Visions can showcase projects and initiatives that align with the values and objectives of PGN, drawing attention to builders and creators who are making a positive impact on society.

2. Amplifying Visibility:
By deploying projects through Fractal Visions’ platform on Optimism and Base Blockchain networks, builders and creators gain access to a broader audience and increased visibility within the decentralized ecosystem. Fractal Visions’ NFT marketplace serves as a gateway for users to discover and engage with impactful projects, driving awareness and engagement with PGN initiatives and fostering a culture of support and collaboration within the community.

3. Facilitating Funding and Support:
Fractal Visions’ platform can serve as a conduit for funding and support for builders and creators within the Superchain ecosystem. Through mechanisms such as NFT sales, auctions, and royalties, Fractal Visions enables creators to monetize their work and generate revenue to support their projects. Additionally, Fractal Visions’ community of collectors and supporters can provide feedback, mentorship, and resources to help projects succeed and thrive.

4. Aligning Incentives:
By integrating Fractal Visions’ NFT marketplace with PGN initiatives, we can align incentives and drive engagement towards impactful projects that contribute to the common good. Through strategic partnerships, cross-promotion, and collaborative campaigns, Fractal Visions and PGN can create a virtuous cycle of support and recognition for builders and creators who are driving positive change within the Superchain ecosystem.

5. Cultivating a Culture of Impact:
Ultimately, the collaboration between Fractal Visions and PGN aims to cultivate a culture of impact within the Superchain community, where builders and creators are empowered to create meaningful change through their projects and initiatives. By providing the necessary tools, resources, and support, Fractal Visions and PGN create an ecosystem where innovation and impact go hand in hand, driving positive change and progress for the benefit of all.

The integration of Fractal Visions’ NFT marketplace with PGN initiatives presents a powerful opportunity to concentrate focus on impact makers within the Superchain ecosystem. By leveraging Fractal Visions’ platform to showcase, fund, and support impactful projects, we can amplify the collective efforts of builders and creators who are driving positive change on Optimism and Base Blockchain networks.

Impact of Public Goods Network Closure on Fractal Visions’ Grants Program:

The announcement of the closure of Public Goods Network (PGN) has had a profound impact on Fractal Visions’ roadmap for rolling out our own grants program, originally planned to be hosted on PGN. The sudden closure has forced us to reevaluate our strategy and pivot towards alternative options. However, this decision has not been without its challenges, as it has disrupted our plans and left many community members and users of the Gitcoin community in limbo, without a clear path forward.

1. Disruption to Roadmap:
The closure of PGN has disrupted Fractal Visions’ roadmap for hosting a grant round on the network. Our initial plans were built around leveraging PGN’s infrastructure and community to support our grants program, but the sudden closure has forced us to reassess our options and pivot towards alternative solutions. This unexpected change has required us to adapt quickly and find alternative platforms to host our grants program.

2. Pivot to Gitcoin Grants Stack and Allo Protocol:
In response to the closure of PGN, Fractal Visions has decided to pivot towards utilizing the Gitcoin Grants stack and Allo Protocol for hosting our grants program on Optimism & Base instead. Both networks offer robust infrastructure and community support, making them viable alternatives for achieving our goals of supporting builders and creators within the Superchain ecosystem. While this pivot represents a significant shift in our original strategy, we believe it is necessary to ensure continuity and stability for our grants program.

3. Lack of Community Decision-Making:
The closure of PGN and the subsequent pivot to alternative platforms has highlighted the lack of community decision-making in the process. As a member of the Gitcoin community, Fractal Visions recognizes the importance of community input and consensus in shaping the direction of grants programs and initiatives. However, the decision to transition away from PGN was made without consulting community members or seeking their input, leaving many feeling disconnected and uncertain about the future.

4. Impact on Community Members:
The closure of PGN and the uncertainty surrounding the transition to alternative platforms have affected many community members and users of the Gitcoin community. Without a clear path forward, community members are left wondering how they will continue to engage with grants programs and support projects within the ecosystem. The lack of transparency and communication surrounding the closure has only exacerbated these concerns, leading to frustration and disillusionment among community members.

5. Moving Forward with Transparency and Inclusivity:
As we move forward with our grants program on alternative platforms, Fractal Visions is committed to ensuring transparency and inclusivity in our decision-making process. We recognize the importance of community input and will actively seek feedback from community members on the design and implementation of our grants program. By engaging with the community and fostering a culture of collaboration and inclusivity, we aim to create a grants program that reflects the needs and aspirations of the Gitcoin community as a whole.

The closure of Public Goods Network has necessitated a pivot in Fractal Visions’ roadmap for rolling out our grants program. While this transition has presented challenges and uncertainties, we remain committed to supporting builders and creators within the Superchain ecosystem.

We are happy to help support the movement.


I appreciate your willingness to have open discussions about the future of PGN. I know you aren’t technically a decision maker, but many in this org will stand behind your POV.

Because PGN’s built on the Bedrock version of the OP stack - and permissionless proposals and fraud proofs are still a WIP from the OP Stack.

Yeah, we probably should not have launched a rollup on mainnet with virtually zero infrastructure, lack of buy-in from Gitcoin, pre EIP-4844/CelestiaDA launch, an extremely tight budget, and a team of two. But hindsight is 20/20.

Fair. But am curious as to who can. From the conversations I’ve had about the implications of shutting down a chain and burning assets I’m a bit alarmed. We are pioneering new frontiers here - on a technical and legal front.

Transparently, I found out about the shutdown a day before it went public - and my opinions on the matter were never taken into consideration. While Nicole and I were working tirelessly to make PGN as successful as it could be, conversations about its future were occurring behind the scenes. I could tell from general sentiment and vibes that a shutdown was a potential consideration, but not a single decision maker at Gitcoin warned us.

The “orderly” plan is to support users in bridging funds off the network, which Nicole and I have been doing almost daily since the shutdown announcement. We’ve also been exploring with other technical workarounds like making a merkle proof of people’s balances on Ethereum.

Additionally, this is not the start of transition discussions. Since January, we had teams with much stronger technical and financial capital than Gitcoin interested to take this on. We even had a proposal to buy the network off of Gitcoin from a venture backed company. Decisions around the transition were a constant back and forth. There were weeks that a PGN transition would be approved and I’d make future career decisions around this prospect, just to get the decision reversed.

No. We are not asking Gitcoin for more funding. If anything, it was abundantly clear to Nicole and I that our lack of serious capital was the biggest hurdle in making PGN succeed and even if Gitcoin gave us more money, they still could not provide the necessary capital needed to run an L2.

Part of my networking and relationship building within the superchain L2 landscape was to get PGN deployed on necessary infrastructure at no cost and to find real funding to back the network. I was able to do both. Yet, Gitcoin proceeded with the shutdown the week before Celestia DA (which reduced our DA costs from $100k a month to $2k a month), after prospects of a significant funding grant from OP, and right as we had integrated new dependencies that bottlenecked key dapps (including allo and passport) from deploying on PGN.

The months following the announcement of the shutdown, PGN was profitable. Despite being a dead chain, had a half million dollar increase on TVL due to growing momentum for the Superchain and around 2k transactions a day. There was a better way to go about the future of PGN. There was real momentum. And PGN still had strong credibility.

Because a year from now is post permissionless proposals and fault proof upgrades from OP Stack. See more here:

The plan is:

Keep in mind, Nicole nor I are on the RaaS provider contract, nor do we have access to the dashboard to make any decisions about rollup specifics. For example, Gitcoin was paying the highest monthly RaaS rates because we were on the highest tier plan - a simple way Nicole and I could have saved Gitcoin money if we were involved in these partnerships.

We are in a “death spiral of inaction” without clear understanding of who makes this decision. If we are continuing with June shutdown date, would love to know who on the Gitcoin team can provide guidance on navigating the path forward.


Hi, peeps. Not going to engage in the convo/back and forth - The decision to shut down PGN at the end of June is final, barring any unforeseen development issues that could impact users’ ability to retrieve their funds. Fin.

Ensuring the safe return of user funds is our top priority. We are actively exploring all options, including the technical workarounds @sophia mentioned, to ensure everyone can securely retrieve their funds.

I appreciate your honesty and dedication to the users of PGN, @sophia . While I am open to community initiatives, the Foundation created this project and must consider the broader implications of any association with PGN and Gitcoin. We need to ensure that our reputation for responsibility and trust is not compromised by potential adverse outcomes that could arise under different stewardship of the PGN network. Because of this and the emerging discussions, we’ll be proceeding with sunsetting PGN.

The decision to shut down PGN was not made lightly. I recognize there’s been a lot of back and forth—I appreciate the patience and involvement of everyone roped into these discussions.

Despite the vision for PGN to be a community-governed network, actual engagement fell short of what was necessary to establish and maintain a decentralized governance structure. As a result, no formal governance was ever implemented, leaving the Gitcoin Foundation responsible for making tough decisions, including the shutdown. We hoped for a better outcome than this, but it reflects the reality of the situation where active community participation was insufficient to drive the governance process forward.

Continuing operations or passing them on are not tenable for various reasons outlined here and in previous shutdown posts from @enidavis and @kyle here. I value community input, but the absence of viable proposals to maintain and fund the network to move forward shows me that there isn’t grounding in tying Gitcoin’s name to the project. Nonetheless, if the community feels strongly about transparency and decentralization, I encourage you to put forth concrete plans, not just discussions, in this forum. I will say now that my vote on such proposals would be ‘no’.

My perspective aligns with @owocki’s view that PGN was fundamentally an experiment—an opportunity to innovate in how we fund and sustain public goods. While not every project will endure, the insights we gain are invaluable.

I sincerely appreciate the efforts and ethos everyone involved has contributed to PGN. It was launched with a vision to support public goods through innovative solutions. The dedication and work that @enidavis , you - @sophia , @lebraat , and @kyle put in were commendable for such a small team.

I encourage those that want to talk (and not pitchfork on CT) to reach out to me. My door is always open for a chat, to discuss any concerns or ideas you may have.


I will add that the behaviour of those who claim to want to be reviving the network is unacceptable to me. Harassing me on twitter, demanding access to resources (dashboards, my attention), refusing to put together a credible plan. Its all very immature + entitled. This is the opposite of what someone doing a credible job of building a coalition would be doing.

I will be disengaging from this topic in the future.


Thanks @owocki - I’m disappointed to hear that people are taking a negligent approach to this and appreciate you setting boundaries.

I will do some pro-active work to ensure that these convos are directed at me (just not on Twitter - find me on FC or book time with me) - and encourage ppl to engage with me directly, I won’t be swayed by side convos and as mentioned this is a Foundation decision.


Thank you for the response. I’m also looking forward to no longer going back and forth.

Since decisions are not up to me, I’d like to disengage from conversations about a transition - and ask the community to please respect my choice.


@sophia you are/have been a champion of PGN, I’m so effing happy to have met you and worked alongside you. I get where you’re coming from - and look forward to ideating on ways to continue funding public goods.

I know this has been difficult - I (again) ask the community to direct convos to me for feedback and not @sophia or @owocki - but lets collab if there are initiatives to investigate.


Hi folks, Josh here from Metagov. Just wanted to poke my head in here and say hi. I’ve spoken to several of the stakeholders here and outside of this forum about a plan to recycle PGN for the purpose of a governance experiment I’ve been designing. I’ll try to share more about that plan in a week or so. I’m posting here now to the Gitcoin community so that it’s not a surprise if/when I come back next week.

To be clear, this is not a commitment to taking on PGN. I’ve been chatting with my own advisors and community about whether we really need an L2 vs. a smart contract to run the experiment we want to run. Sounds like there are other people working on plans as well, and I’d encourage you to continue working on those! If some of you are thinking seriously about PGN for rigorous, output-driven research purposes, feel free to ping me.


I haven’t been involved in the inner workings of PGN, but I have been on the frontlines of a few GG rounds where I have witnessed the struggles of users and of those working on PGN. So I just want to say this:

I really appreciated @enidavis’s retrospective on PGN and what I gathered from it was the magnitude of anyone else taking over PGN and doing it successfully longterm, and that it isn’t very viable at this point. So that being said, why has no one from the community come forward with a decent proposal at this point? It leads me to believe that not nearly enough thought has gone into it. Which leads me to believe that if by now a proposal hasn’t been presented it probably won’t be. Maybe I’m wrong here, but I can only speak to what I see. I would be interested to see a strong proposal and what a transition could look like fwiw.

Case & Point of the magnitude has been outlined in the discussion and the retro.

Fwiw I appreciate what @deltajuliet has said above and I support the decision. I know none of these decisions were made lightly, and I trust that the team will handle it in the proper and correct manner.

I also just want to point out that I am extremely disheartened by what I’ve seen on CT this week from trusted members of our community. This is not the way. I hope a lesson has been learnt here.

Just want to say thank you to @enidavis and @sophia for your hard work and your dedication, including everyone else that have worked on PGN with this novel idea and initiative. I would urge those that are out there online crowdsourcing information and solutions to let the team here work, as what I’m seeing online doesn’t seem to be too helpful at all rn.