# Retro Conference: A Hypercert Evaluation Framework
*A concept note for retroactive public goods funding by copying academia*

## Problem Statement
The hypercert market faces a fundamental challenge: buyers cannot effectively evaluate impact claims. Without trusted verification mechanisms, neither projects nor funders can price impact accurately, preventing market formation.

## Proposed Solution
We propose creating a retroactive evaluation system that combines academic-style peer review with evidence synthesis and market-driven funding mechanisms. This system would provide the quality assurance needed for a functioning impact market.

## Core Mechanism: The Retro Conference
The heart of the system is a quarterly conference where completed work faces rigorous evaluation. Projects submit their work anonymously to themed tracks focused on areas like climate, education, and open source. Expert panels review each submission without knowing its source, while a public feedback period adds additional verification.

The evaluation process begins with projects submitting comprehensive evidence portfolios documenting both direct impact and downstream effects. Expert panels then assess this evidence through blind review, focusing on verification and value quantification. Public feedback enriches this assessment by surfacing additional evidence and mapping broader value chains.

## The Hypercert Journal
Work accepted at retro conferences enters the hypercert journal, a curated registry of verified impact. The journal organizes verified hypercerts into themed tracks, each maintaining rigorous quality standards. Like academic journals, different tracks may develop varying levels of prestige based on impact significance and verification rigor.

The journal serves as more than a repository. Through its citation system, it maps connections between related work, showing how innovations build on each other. A climate solution verified in one conference might inspire educational initiatives verified in another, with the journal tracking these impact chains. This creates a rich knowledge base of what works, why, and how impact spreads.

## Evidence Synthesis
Time becomes an ally in impact measurement. As months and years pass, the true influence of a project becomes clear through documented outcomes, unexpected benefits, and derivative innovations. The journal captures this evolving story, with each hypercert's entry growing richer as new evidence emerges.

The resulting registry of verified hypercerts serves multiple purposes. It establishes quality benchmarks, enables value comparison, and maps the complex networks of influence that define real impact. Each verified hypercert becomes a node in this growing knowledge network.

## Funding Mechanism
The system's economic engine runs on three complementary funding streams. First, a conference prize pool rewards exceptional impact, funded through sponsor contributions and entry fees. Second, journal subscriptions provide sustainable funding through funder membership fees, offering access to the verified registry and priority funding rights. Third, citation royalties create automatic value flow through the network, rewarding projects that inspire others.

This three-part funding model ensures both immediate rewards for outstanding work and sustainable long-term funding for the broader ecosystem. Major prizes attract high-quality submissions, while ongoing royalties support continued development.

## Success Metrics
The system's success will be measured through three lenses. Market formation tracks secondary trading, price discovery, and buyer participation. Quality indicators examine evidence standards, review consistency, and citation patterns. Community health considers the caliber of submissions, reviewer engagement, and funder participation.