This should be an IRL event. I suggest doing it during some bigger events, like Devcon which will take place in Bangkok in November.
I voted FOR on the Snapshot vote.
2 Likes
Voted “FOR” because who doesn’t love a good offsite? Let’s explore this idea during a major event like Devcon or ETHDenver—where better to brainstorm DAO strategy than surrounded by crypto enthusiasts? Plus, it’s a great excuse to mix business with some much-needed networking.
2 Likes
@danielo thank you for the proposal. This is really interesting but I have doubts concerning its execution and logistics. I think that it would be really expensive to create independent off-site events to gather delegates together, given that we all live in different places. I think that it would be easier and more practical to organize them as side events at other conferences. Would it make a big difference in your opinion?
I am voting “abstain” on this proposal.
While I understand is about exploring the possibility, I think we are going a bit outside the general scope of sentiment check, which should be about more scoped an detailed proposals, while in here we are doing the sentiment check of the sentiment check.
For example, if this was a proposal about having a 1 day event at devcon/ethcc/denver as side event, with a venue specifically for all delegates, some specific rooms for top X delegates, and a specific agenda, I would have voted yes. On an event that it outside any major one, I would vote against (i started larping as a cow to avoid flying all over the world, so I personally prefer going in another continent and do more stuff at once) etcetera.
3 Likes
Smart move . Creating a dedicated space for delegates and key stakeholders to engage deeply on strategic and organizational topics could address existing bottlenecks and improve decision-making processes. This proposal offers a valuable opportunity to collaborate more effectively, and I believe it’s worth investigating further. I hope this move can involve the greatest number of users to address the current problems of DAO.
1 Like
I like this proposal. Voted for at this stage so we can explore the possibility, seems interesting. I’m also supportive of recording these potential meetings.
2 Likes
I love the idea of exploring this. Off sites offer a unique opportunity to connect and enhance collaboration.
1 Like
Delegates have different opinions here (I’ve heard at least 4 different options). I can’t commit dozens of hours to explore a project where the delegates won’t at least commit 30min to explore it - as explained in the Jumpstart Fund proposal, it’s very risky (low probability of success and hence low probability to get paid anything) and time-consuming to make the work to propose anything. So hence this vote to check whether I’m not going to waste my time and de-risk this by ensuring minimum buy-in at least for a discussion.
@JoJo I understand your posture. So let’s agree to disagree 
IMO as long as we’re using attention effectively (e.g. short proposal that takes little time to decide upon), I see a staged process of buy-in as valuable and ultimately something that optimises attention usage.
I have just realised that the suggested voting options were accidentally missed by Frisson when making the poll… they were planned to be
- in favour, I’ll commit at least 30min to explore this
- in favour, but I prefer others to discuss it
- against, let’s dedicate attention somewhere else
- abstain
lacking those options changes the nature of the poll 
2 Likes
@KlausBrave The history of edits is available for everyone to see in Discord. Just click on the pencil icon.
The poll was indeed deleted as it was a failed strategy (couldn’t get enough eyeballs on it and also hard to match votes with token representation. Ultimately I found it to be confusing despite showing support which is what I want, so preferred to have a clean start with Snapshot). So hence moving to an improved approach of a Snapshot poll (delegates incentives and karma metrics help here).
I won’t commit dozens of hours to plan a thing for which enough top delegates won’t even show up. It would be a waste of everyone’s time. So hence the Snapshot poll as a temp check before deciding to do any further planning/discussion.
1 Like
Although I’m personally more of an online enthusiast and rarely participate in offline activities, I have to admit that occasional offline events indeed help strengthen community cohesion and advance Arbitrum’s mass adoption. So I fully support this proposal.
I am voting FOR this proposal on Snapshot
Since the proposal states that
I see no reason to vote against exploring a concept. I recognize there are valid arguments against it, but none strong enough to deny the opportunity for discussion.
There’s no reason t vote now on this we think as it’s stated many times this is purely a initial discussion. Overall, we think something like this would be great, just to have a lot of the delegates meet is a huge plus in this virtual space.
We think budgets for this should be pretty low, if not only enough to host venue spaces. Travel and transportation grants maybe? But for the delegates that already receive delegate incentives, this doesn’t make the most sense to us.
I voted “FOR” because the reasons stated above, but I don’t like the idea of having a snapshot to check if the author should proceed with the topic or not.
We are voting in favor of the ArbitrumDAO Offsite on Snapshot, as it has the potential to enhance community collaboration. However, we suggest providing a more detailed budget breakdown to ensure all costs are adequately covered, considering hybrid participation options like summaries or recordings for those unable to attend in person, and prioritizing security measures to ensure the safety of all delegates traveling to an unfamiliar area.
This is a great experiment and generally IRL gatherings offer much greater returns in terms of interpersonal relationships people are able to form because of such occasions. In the end it is these interpersonal relationships which build and thrive culture in any org, hence we are in favor of this proposal.
We vote FOR this temp-check on Snapshot.
We are in favor of exploring an opportunity for delegates to effectively work on important matters in an offline environment during a big conference like DevCon. The details and execution plan should be definitely sorted out, though.
We are voting for this proposal as we recognize the potential benefits of bringing delegates together for an offsite.
However, we would like to note that this current process—of voting to research and then writing a proposal—might be more drawn out than necessary.
Instead of temperature-checking an idea that has already been informally discussed with delegates, we believe it would be more efficient to start with a structured brainstorming session. This approach would allow to refine and develop the concept collaboratively before moving to a formal vote, ensuring that the final proposal is well-considered and fully aligned with the needs of the DAO.
We support efforts to enhance delegate collaboration and look forward to seeing the results of this research. However, streamlining our process in the future could save time and resources, enabling us to focus on implementing impactful initiatives more swiftly.
2 Likes
I voted FOR this proposal. I think regular (perhaps semi-annual) in-person engagement between DAO stakeholders and contributors is valuable. I’d like to note that I will be biased towards implementations that are low-cost and focused. I don’t want the DAO to pay for luxurious travel or non-DAO focused travel expenses of any kind.
1 Like
After consideration, the @SEEDgov delegation has decided to “FOR” on this proposal at the Snapshot vote.
Rationale
At SEEDGov, we have observed that in-person work instances, such as EthCC, have had a positive impact on governance by fostering proposal generation and discussions. We believe that organizing an off-site event presents a valuable opportunity to replicate this kind of productive experience. We appreciate that the proposer has chosen to first gauge the DAO’s sentiment on this initiative before proceeding with the original proposal
1 Like
The following reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking, and ideation of the two.
We’re voting FOR the proposal on Snapshot.
Overall, having an event focused on delegates and facilitated so that crucial issues at the DAO are addressed and worked on could be a significant value-add.
However, we believe that there are many challenges to making such an event productive and valuable (such as - getting enough delegates in the room, having the right agenda and prep work done beforehand so that either some decisions can be made or the next steps can be approved, etc.). Therefore, we believe that the event doesn’t necessarily have to be in person; we could start with an online event to lower the barrier for delegates to get involved, and if we see that such a formula works and helps us move things forward, we can decide to have an in-person offsite.
As outlined by Daniel, above, our “For” vote is meant to reflect our commitment to spending the necessary time to explore the creation of a DAO Offsite. However, we want to clarify that we’re voting for the proposal as a directional signal. Should a proposal go to an on-chain vote, we’ll assess the details and vote accordingly based on its merit.
3 Likes