It is easier to agree on what has been useful than on what is useful
The core principle behind the concept of retroactive public goods funding, as mentioned in the Retroactive Public Goods Funding giving Exit to public goods (OSS) article, is that it is easier to agree on what has been useful than on what will be useful. This understanding is based on the idea that using a DAO allows for Manage with DAO-based decentralization by dissolving the company, which means "let's stock profits with Decentralization," as understood by tkgshn.icon.
The reason for retroactively evaluating value and effectiveness is simple: It is easier to agree on what has been useful than on what is useful. The former is often a source of disagreement, but it can still be resolved through existing voting mechanisms such as quadratic voting or regular voting. The latter is much more challenging. In the profit-making sector, the best approach is to create an ecosystem where people can create startups, invest in them, and be rewarded if they are successful. Instead of reinventing the wheel, we can create a public-goods-oriented version of the same mechanism.
To achieve this, the mechanism of One person, one vote is implemented. In the case of using a Results Oracle for retroactive funding (=Futarchy) for "tax revenues of any autonomous body or nation" rather than Optimism's FeePool, the decision of the Results Oracle is distributed based on one person, one vote in a democratic manner. Voting through investment is separate and involves purchasing Project Tokens.
As shogochiai mentioned on July 27, 2021, when the decision-making power of the Results Oracle is not based on one person, one vote, the concept of "Market Failure" starts to emerge. This can lead to attempts to bribe or kickbacks with a small number of decision-making powers, or even a situation where decision-making power is given to the wealthy.
As tkgshn mentioned on November 18, 2021, by conducting a meta-vote asking "Did everyone find XX to be the most useful?" we can determine what truly was useful. Incentives can be given to those who correctly identify XX. In retrospect, this can be seen as a Beauty Contest, involving elements of Prediction market and Regression to the Mean.