Hi all,
As an intro, I am an Ethereum researcher and this is in my first time engaging with the Arbitrum DAO, I wasn’t aware of this proposal until I saw a post from Max about it (below).
I am very surprised that Timeboost is being pushed by the Arbitrum team and also has unaminous DAO support, without almost any consideration for the actual economic impact it could have. This is a core protocol level change, and yet all of the discussion is around revenue, and not the impact it would have on trading, arbitrage, or basically anything else.
I am new to the DAO so I could be missing something, but the paid (?) research also doesn’t go into the detail of the challenges or potential downsides… I am quite perplexed how one of the biggest chains in the space (and largest L2) could consider such a serious change with such little basic information available?
I have been a supporter of Arbitrum from afar for its L2 efforts, but this seems like a serious misstep. It is a deeply technical proposal which has almost 0 push back or discussion, which I am disappointed in seeing.
I can only assume that delegates are just unaware of the actual implications here, but I am still left confused by the process in which this is being implemented. Concerned enough that I feel like I needed to actually make a post just to share the thoughts from other people in the Ethereum community.
In short, given the lack of economic analysis and lack of in-depth research, this is a proposal that could break the chain or reduce its performance or user experience, just to optimise DAO revenue.
Maybe I have missed some of the thorough research and impact analysis, I would love to read if there are any. What blockworks and delphi have shared is basic at best.
Thanks,
MevAintFree