Arbitrum Strategic Objective Setting (SOS) – Defining the DAO’s Interim Goals

[JoJo]

@Entropy

@JoJo

This could be partially solved by having epochs long 4/6 months in which

This was something we thought about adding when we drafted the proposal. However, there are quite a few frictions we foresaw with this approach. For example, it’s well-known that DAOs often move slowly, inherent to their decentralized nature, meaning that, e.g., 6 months might not be enough time for the objectives’ “correctness” to materialize. This means that delegates may be more inclined to vote for a change prematurely, especially given delegates voting for a change can’t be obligated to create a submission. Compare this to the current structure, where ad hoc objective adjustments can be proposed by anyone at any time, but this requires them to post reasoning for the change together with adjusted objectives and key results. As such, objectives could still be changed 2/4/6/etc. months after their implementation, but the proposer must be able to clearly justify the reasoning and exert effort in creating an adjusted objectives matrix. This ensures that proposals for change are tied to accountability and require proposers to deeply think about the current objectives as well as what should be changed and why. The proposal also suggests instructing the research member of the ARDC to create quarterly reports on how the DAO is doing against its objectives, meaning that active delegates will receive timely updates on any potential changes that might be needed.

I think this is fair. I totally understand how a quarter or 6 months might just not be enough to evaluate the mid term status of a goal, I did personally face the same thoughts on the D.A.O. program.
The proposed solution is good enough then (having the entity responsible for that goal being able to steer it if deemed necessary + quarterly report from ARDC on metrics), because yes DAOs are slow.

Thank you for addressing my concerns here, I am in generally voting in favor and would have had despite the clarification above, because we need to make concrete what we started with MVP and we need to move from a high level vision to more tangible goals. It’s a long process but I bet will bring a new level of maturity in our DAO.