I decided to vote FOR.
These kinds of events typically bring great benefits, and it would be valuable to see how they work for the DAO. While virtual meetings are effective, in-person events often foster stronger relationships.
I also appreciate that part of the budget is dedicated to grants, allowing people to apply for financial assistance to attend.
And of course, this FOR comes with my commitment to dedicating time each week to contribute and support the development of this proposal.
I am voting “For” to signal support for the idea as any time we can increase collaboration among the DAO members I believe that is a good thing. And at this stage I would like to at least see the discussion move forward.
That said, while I think this is a good idea I personally would not be attending any Offsite ventures solely due to personal reasons. While I don’t want to detract from the value in-person meetups bring to something like this, I would suggest including some type of way for people who cannot attend in-person events to at least either be still involved in some capacity or have a way to stay updated to avoid falling out of the loop.
Edit: In order to save forum space, I am editing this post to indicate my vote will remain “For” on tally. I appreciate the efforts to make this accessible to online delegates and look forward to what this collaboration can bring.
We’re voting FOR exploring the ArbitrumDAO offsite concept. This initiative could unlock collaborative problem-solving and accelerate decision-making within the DAO. While execution details need ironing out, the potential benefits warrant further investigation. Starting with a virtual format could maximize delegate participation and prove the concept’s value before committing to an in-person event. Our “for” vote signals willingness to contribute time to refine this idea, not blanket approval for implementation.
@danielo I understand what you mean but I don’t see the point of voting for something that is so vague for the moment. I get that it’s a temperature check and not even a proposal, but based on how the poll is structured I feel like my doubts were justified. In your previous comment I read that the voting options were meant to be different, so now I understand better. But allow me to say that before your explanation, it was not so clear, or at least not for me. I still want to thank you for your time and clarifications, I appreciate it. I will vote “abstain” as I don’t have a specific opinion on the topic at this current stage.
The results are in for the ArbitrumDAO Off-site offchain proposal.
See how the community voted and more Arbitrum stats:
DAOplomats voted FOR this proposal on Snapshot for our reasons here:
Firstly, we definitely think this is a great and fun idea. There’s no doubt that when organizing in-person events, it’s crucial to be clear and careful with both budgeting and logistics. For instance, Govhack is a great example of this – it was such a fun and productive process, and seeing more initiatives like this would really excite us. You might want to get in touch with @KlausBrave about this, as he is truly passionate and dedicated to organizing great events. Additionally, we fully support @krst’s idea of organizing online events first. This approach allows delegates to connect and chat beforehand, while also helping to shape their ideas for an in-person event.
gm, directionally in favor of having an offsite.
Even if I couldn’t participate in the previous gatherings, they are a much more effective way to plan and strategize on the next steps for the DAO.
Hey all, the offsite poll has passed with 130mn in favour, so we’re starting to explore the design. We’ve created this form that will be used as a first to gather requirements to inform the design of the offsite. Please all delegates and key stakeholders (foundation, OCL, etc.) take 5 minutes to answer this so your voice is taken into account
@realdumbird @dk3 @IronBoots @mihal @yoavw @Soby @ChainLinkGod @cattin @PrincetonBlockchain @0x_ultra a reminder to fill the offsite form please
@Bob-Rossi @DaiDai8800 @coltron.eth @Galxe @limes @WintermuteGovernance @Camelot @Cornell_Blockchain see above please
Below are the reflections of the UADP:
We are in favor of exploring an off-site for delegates to discuss topics more intricately. This can be a nice supplement to the GovHacks that occurred during Eth conferences. It would be nice to collaborate with Hack Humanity to lay out a schedule to see which topics should be covered–along with discussions around if there should be communities or councils that separately pop up in different geographic locations, discuss topics, and then converge online.
Voted FOR. In-person collaboration has driven clear results for DAO initiatives. We need more of these and not less.
I think IRL events are necessary to better coordinate actions and planning of any DAO. I’m making these questions on both posts, to get a better understanding:
What are the main differences (in terms of the event itself) between this proposal and the GovHack? - specially the “Core Series”
Both initiatives are targeting DevCon. Does it make sense to have both events?
Is there a way to merge both initiatives if they are complementary?
Thanks for the proposal!
Answered here 
Voted in favor of this proposal, with devcon w/scholarships being the top choice
in person events are a great idea, and doing them in conjunction with major events is an obvious plus as its much more efficient and easy since everyone’s already there.
Travel scholarships should be very conservatively given in our view. 20k per person is probably way too much, but could make sense for teams.
One last concern is that there’s ovelap with Govhack. If govhack devcon is happening it may be good to coordinate with them to either combine events or compliment them.
Cross-posting here as GovHack has an updated proposal for Devcon only Nov 8-10, the proposal includes starting with a Core/Offsite day, then the Open Hackathon and Community Day.
We believe this to be the best format to fulfil multiple needs of the DAO in a single IRL event + online facilitation before and after.
This redesign can achieve all outcomes we have received feedback on from delegates and new talent alike.
It also includes a dedicated online programme of 4-weeks OnRamp activity and 4-weeks post-GovHack support programme which addresses a common refrain; how do keep all this amazing energy activated IRL and have people stay with Arbitrum.
Lastly it’s much cheaper, we have just completed real budgeting with suppliers here in Bangkok.
Check it out, Snapshot voting incoming…
Here is the latest version of the proposal focused on Devcon in Bangkok Nov 8-10 only for now (longer-term plans will be handled in a separate proposal):
Let us know what you think.
It seems to me that ArbitrumDAO Off-site and GovHack events are both planned at the same time, November 8th-10th during DevCon in Bangkok. So, we have two competing events, both planned for delegates.
We will soon have both events on Snapshot. We need to vote for one or the other it seems. It doesn’t make sense to fund both events at the same time.
For clarity, the travel scholarship budget is 20k or 50k in total, not per person. And would only include economy-class tickets.
As mentioned our budget will be revised based on the selected format, but second, your proposal includes many breakout rooms and community activities. It’s by design something more divergent. While we’re proposing something a lot more focused on converging on a key strategy/topic.
In practice, I think the ideal situation is to have our Online proposal accepted first and then have something like GovHack after. So we can first converge on strategy and then go divergent with community proposals (hackathon-style).
