Continued Funding for the Arbitrum Foundation

Proposals
3

I appreciate the progress made growing the Arbitrum ecosystem.

That said, given the size of this ask, I believe stronger tokenholder alignment and accountability are needed.

My biggest concern is that while ecosystem growth is emphasized, direct value accrual to ARB holders remains unclear. The current model appears to be: 1) Foundation funds growth, 2) ecosystem expands, 3) DAO revenue grows, 4) Foundation returns for more funding.

But ARB holders continue funding expansion without a clear mechanism to benefit directly. Ecosystem growth alone should not automatically be treated as tokenholder value.

A few suggestions:

  1. Milestone-based funding instead of full upfront release, tied to measurable KPIs such as DAO revenue growth, institutional onboarding, RWA expansion, or ecosystem ROI. A request of this size should not be necessarily be released entirely upfront especially when is being requested it upon vote passage (seemse to quick of a turnaround with no clear KPIs.)
  2. Stronger ARB holder alignment, including utility that directly benefits ARB (staking, fee participation, revenue-linked mechanisms, etc.).
  3. Consider making a portion of the ARB allocation performance-based, released ONLY if meaningful ARB utility/value capture milestones are achieved.

I appreciate the work being done, but at this scale, funding should be more tightly aligned with accountability and measurable tokenholder outcomes as well.

1 Like