Thank you for submitting this novel proposal. We appreciate the initiative to explore AI-powered tooling to enhance proposal refinement and stakeholder alignment, a direction we believe is valuable for scaling DAO governance.
After reviewing the SimScore proposal, we would like to offer early feedback and suggestions:
Add a Test Pilot Before Launching Full Integration
While the technology appears mature, we suggest running a pilot with 1-2 high-traffic proposals to evaluate its output quality, edit relevance, and proposer trust. This allows:
- Community and proposer feedback on AI-edits and justifications
- Iterative refinement of scoring weights or edit thresholds
- Clear examples of success before full deployment
This could be framed as a “SimScore Pilot Program” within the Arbitrum forum.
Surface and Weight Delegate vs. Community Feedback Separately
Since post-temperature check feedback will involve token-weighted community signaling, we recommend making delegate vs. general community inputs distinct:
- Delegates may carry more strategic context or governance implications.
- SimScore could add an optional “delegates-only consensus” metric.
This would also help proposers prioritize feedback from key stakeholders.
Final Thoughts
StableLab is supportive of innovative approaches that can streamline governance workflows and reduce contributor fatigue, especially during proposal review cycles. SimScore introduces a structured way to translate community input into actionable edits, this is a promising start.
However, we strongly believe the rollout should:
- Start small with a pilot phase,
- Add oversight and transparency safeguards before becoming a default tool for proposal refinement.
In addition, we agree with @paulofonseca that these types of initiatives could be better served under a specific grants program that can assess more thoroughly the fitness of the tool for Arbitrum governance and analyze all gathered feedback.