From 68efbe8d29896aa57d6f319b5d536853fa13a892 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Carl Cervone <42869436+ccerv1@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2024 15:37:59 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] fix: round number (#2399)

---
 apps/docs/blog/2024-10-24-rf5-ballot-box/index.md | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/apps/docs/blog/2024-10-24-rf5-ballot-box/index.md b/apps/docs/blog/2024-10-24-rf5-ballot-box/index.md
index 1d73f4c50..23ec18345 100644
--- a/apps/docs/blog/2024-10-24-rf5-ballot-box/index.md
+++ b/apps/docs/blog/2024-10-24-rf5-ballot-box/index.md
@@ -83,8 +83,8 @@ Voters may be more likely to vote for smaller projects because they are easier t
 This appears to have played out in RF5. Many of the larger projects from previous rounds saw a reduction in their RF5 funding. Examples include:
 
 - Protocol Guild: 223K OP in RF5 (vs 663K OP in RF3)
-- go-ethereum: 234K OP in RF5 (vs 496K OP in RF4)
-- Solidity: 204K OP in RF5 (vs 422K OP in RF4)
+- go-ethereum: 234K OP in RF5 (vs 496K OP in RF3)
+- Solidity: 204K OP in RF5 (vs 422K OP in RF3)
 
 Meanwhile, many of the smaller team efforts from RF3 saw an increase in their funding in RF5. Examples include: