The Arbitrum DAO Procurement Committee has demonstrated considerable success in Phase I, establishing important procurement frameworks and infrastructure. However, while we support extending their tenure, we acknowledge that the proposal could benefit from a clearer budget breakdown, especially in terms of how funds will be allocated across different initiatives. In future phases, it would also be beneficial to engage the community earlier on re-election processes, ensuring a smooth transition and avoiding unnecessary centralization concerns. Addressing these key points would enhance both transparency and alignment with the DAOâs long-term objectives.
Finally, I believe a great direction for ADPC is to head towards building a market place for builders that really shows builders: Arbitrum is the best place to build your business. Focusing on the builder stakeholders and getting a good enough marketplace first, would add more value than going vertical by vertical.
Voted For: After reviewing the proposal and feedback from fellow delegates I believe that Arbtirum DAO will benefit from this proposal being approved. Feedback regarding the election is a bit unclear to me, so I expect that the committee will be fully transparent about all future activities and will take our feedback into consideration. But I donât think this is such a blocker that we need another rewrite of the proposal. I believe that the committee will take our feedback and improve without a new proposal.
I voted FOR on Tally, but my comments still remain true: we should have a proper structure to keep the knowledge within the DAO for if/when service providers change, the work can proceed without a big disruption.
I voted FOR this proposal on Tally for the reasons outlined below. Iâm comfortable with the teamâs approach of focusing on execution only for the events vertical to reduce scope. I still think itâs ambitious to tackle two verticals at once, but am willing to let it play out and observe the results. Iâm fine with the re-election of the current ARDC members, as I think continuity will benefit execution.
The following reflects the views of L2BEATâs governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and itâs based on the combined research, fact-checking, and ideation of the two.
Weâre voting AGAINST the proposal, just like we did during temp-check, and for the same reasons outlined in our previous comment as we donât feel that our concerns had been addressed and mitigated.
Weâd like to point out that unfortunately this did not happen and we remain skeptical about the usefulness and effectiveness of this procurement processes. Moreover, even in the budget breakdown the OpEx budget (WP3) remains a single vague line with costs being somehow spread out across WP1 tasks. We are still not convinced by the budget breakdown and the tasks listed there.
While we appreciate and respect the work the ADPC team has done so far, we donât see enough justification to allocate this amount of funding to continue this initiative.
We voted FOR the Procurement Committee Phase II on Tally. Weâre looking forward to the outcomes of all 4 work packages and believe that Axis, Areta, and Daimon will do a good job. We hope to see regular reports to ensure accountability.
gTrade supports the proposal to extend the ADPCâs tenure into Phase II. The ADPC has established a much-needed procurement framework, bringing both structure and efficiency to the ecosystem. While there may be concerns about the lack of elections, itâs important to consider the time required to effectively onboard new members. From an efficiency standpoint, allowing the current team to continue into the next phase is a resource-optimized approach. The Arbitrum DAO can then evaluate their performance at the conclusion of Phase II.
We maintain our decision made at its Snapshot voting phase and appreciate the additional information added to the proposal. We also appreciate the future effort to make sure that there will be elections before the next phase of the committee with potential collaborations with Entropy and/or other suitable entities.
I appreciate the changes in the proposal, as well as the feedback from the Snapshot proposal.
I highly value the structure and thoroughness of the ADPC reports. Helped a lot while we were planning onboarding working group problems to solved, for example.
Itâs clear that with the current quorum, the proposal will pass, but I genuinely wish we had a better cost-benefit ratio for the expenses. Even though, okay, the next phase will come with re-elections, I feel like lately, the DAO is just saying yes to everything, voting, distributing funds, and weâre not demanding results in return, raising the bar, or seeking more clarity in the process.
Especially with this project thatâs involved in security and procurement.
Even though I voted yes on Snapshot, this time I voted Against in Tally
While additional spending is not desired, some way to manage the DAO spending is needed, and this seems to be the only current way proposed. We will monitor the success of this initiative to see if it can meaningfully reduce DAO spending.
While I appreciate the ADPCâs efforts and support the continuation of their work, including the structure and processes theyâve established, I believe the analysis provided for selecting RPCs as the vertical was insufficient to justify the decision.
As I mentioned privately, there was no visible quantitative analysis of potential cost savingsâonly a high-level indication of whether they were âhighâ or âlow.â This would have made way easier to justify the selection.
I apologize for not engaging in a more extensive discussion before the vote.
Post the passing of the Tally vote for Phase II of the ADPC, we wanted to thank the community for your trust in the ADPC and all the great feedback and deep engagement thus far!
In this second phase, we will focus on the key initiatives highlighted in our work packages above, including:
Procuring RPC providers to strengthen the Arbitrum ecosystem;
Providing the procurement services for events identified within the DAO Events Budget for 2025;
Continued management of the Subsidy Fund for Security Services;
Definition and creation of an Operational Expense (OpEx) budget for the Arbitrum DAO;
Creating a Phase II Outcome Report, similar to the one we have published for Phase I.
In terms of regular updates and engagement with the community, we aim to:
Provide a weekly update on our progress through a weekly ADPC Update Thread;
Hold bi-weekly calls with the DAO, as on the DAO governance calendar, on every second Thursday at 16.00 CET;
Provide monthly updates via the Governance Reporting Call.
Weâre extremely excited to carry on with our efforts to pioneer decentralized procurement processes in this phase and supporting the growth of the Arbitrum ecosystem through effective procurement strategies.
I voted for this proposal in Tally, for the same reasons I did in Snapshot; past work by the ADPC had a positive impact. However, some concerns raised above are valid. Will keep tabs on reports and progress.