I think supporting a retroactive funding round with a matched funding amount would be the right mechanism 

Gitcoin has had some success here

Not until they reach some level of decentralization

matching seems like the best idea but voting also seems like it would be much better and more fair if handled by @purple instead of a few people at @purpler. Something to visit in a few months since funding based on just an idea with no accountability was recently shot down by some of the community

I support everyone who said matching funds is a better idea.

Simply funding purpler should not be even considered at this stage because purpler did not deliver anything so far. Let's wait a few weeks and then purple can better evaluate if it makes sense to fund purpler or not.

Searchcaster