We appreciate the need for improving operational efficiency within the DAO. However, even after reading the responses to other delegates on the same point, we see a strong overlap between this proposal and the scope of Entropy Advisors.
The DAO has committed $2.47M per year (plus bonus) to @Entropy to help with the governance process and governance proposals, synchronize the activities of various stakeholders, attract strategic partners and top talent, and improve operations and cash flow.
While we appreciate this initiative and the work both Disruption Joe and Alex Lumley are continuously doing for Arbitrum DAO, we believe this specific proposal to be redundant both in scope and funds allocation.
Weāve decided to completely rewrite the proposal with more one on one feedback from delegates along with all the notes here. We appreciate the DAO being open to a draft level posting going to the forum to maximize the feedback we receive.
We are aiming for a new version of the proposal to be up next week.
A lot of other delegates have addressed questions that I share, although I wonāt waste your time repeating them. However, Iāll add a few things.
Pretty much everything you listed as problem areas I agree with. Iāve either experienced them myself or have had discussions with builders who echo similar sentiment. Itās unfortunate these issues still exist, as I know itās been discussed for a while and different attempts have been made to resolve them. Iāve historically been supportive of any initiative that tries to resolve this, as Iāve gotten to the point of āthrow enough crap to see what sticksā.
You mentioned a monthly governance callā¦ what extra value would this add beyond the bi-weekly calls & monthly call already in place with the DAO?
As a though exercise, what would you have done to prevent this from happening had you been in this role earlier this year (Proposal for Financial Restitution For ArbitrumDAO Grant Winners)? This is just one example, but in my experience some of the roadblocks were seeing arenāt anything the DAO can necessarily control.
Thank you for addressing most of the comments @DisruptionJoe . I think itās now clearer how you and Alex will collaborate. From my short experience as a delegate, Iāve noticed your consistent activity, and knowing youāve already worked with Entropy gives us even more confidence that the processes will run smoothly. We would appreciate @AlexLumley participation in this proposal to bring another angle and complement each other. I also think six months could be a good start to see results, measure them, and keep giving your best to the ecosystem. I look forward to the new proposal on Tally to make a final decision.
This proposal is well-intentioned and addresses some of the real problems currently faced by DAOs. If properly implemented, it can really improve the efficiency and transparency of the whole DAO. I think there should be a clearer mechanism for evaluating the results, so as to avoid investing resources without substantial improvement.
One very important point is clear goals and accountability: the main issue raised in the proposal is the lack of confidence in the current implementation of the DAO, and the lack of clear goals and milestones for many projects, which leads to delegates and contributors not knowing how the progress is going. This is a really big issue, especially for the management of new proposals and ongoing projects, and there should be a more organized presentation of program progress and results.
Another thing thatās great to see this, implementation and outcome assessment: the proposal lists a lot of specific outputs and outcomes, such as the creation of a Governance Operations Wiki, a proposal database, etc., and these tools really help everyone to better track project progress and priorities. But I suggest that in addition to these tools, we should also consider how to make delegates and contributors more proactive in using these tools, we canāt just have a system and no one to use it.
Thank you for your proposal, the ideas and starting point are great, and I appreciate your work!
See what you mean, the proposal wants to address the current coordination and accountability issues of the Arbitrum DAO, it is recommended to consider long-term governance planning at the same time to avoid the need for ad-hoc solutions every time you encounter a similar problem, the budget of $200,000 is not too high but you need to make sure that itās well spent, and it is recommended to evaluate the progress and effectiveness of their work on a regular basis.
Also I find the tools and systems mentioned in the proposal helpful, but need to make sure they are actually used by delegates and contributors and not just for show.
Also in regards to efficient communication, I think the monthly governance report conference calls and snapshot assessments are very necessary to help delegates get up to speed quickly and save everyone time spent on background checks. This point proposal is written more in place, I hope that the actual implementation can be truly grounded, to avoid formalization, representatives from all over the world, I see that non-English-speaking countries also participated in the delegates, each time I have seen the end of the meeting before the end of the relevant highlights, and after the end of the delegates to summarize and summarize the link to the meeting.
The idea behind this proposal is very good and indeed needed to be way better structured and organized. Especially for new delegates its hard to keep up. Im myself are still struggling to keep up with everything and to detect new proposals and where and when to vote/comment.
The only problem I have is the amount of money being asked. 200k for 6 months seems a lot for me.
Are you planning on working fulltime 40h+ a week on this? If not I would rather say 120k seems more reasonable.
It seems that the amounts in web3 arenāt based on anything real or realistic.
Getting 33k per month for two persons is in my opinion too much.