This is a great idea that was already accepted in Snapshot 4 months ago.
There have been no significant changes in that time, so I voted YES.
I like this proposal for several reasons:
It will prevent projects from using the grant inappropriately
It will reduce operational costs for monitoring projects
It will involve more users in projects with grants. Even if they do not find any violations, they will at least understand the project and its prospects in detail
I like the proposal primarily for its thoughtful approach compared to previous grant programs.
This time, it is the Arbiter that will decide what and how much to give incentives to projects, which in turn will have to meet the requirements for the season
The amount in dollars is significantly less than previous grants - on the one hand, this is good, because large grants greatly deplete the treasury without any certain success for the Arbiter. On the other hand, weak incentives may not affect the attraction of users if this program is not actively promoted.
I like that the DAO will also take part in the development of goals for each season. This will give impetus to the development of the community, which will better understand what exactly the Arbiter requires and how to improve the incentive system in order to avoid unnecessary expenses in the future
I voted FOR this proposal
Firstly, we actually have no choice because of the very big changes in the main chain - Ethereum
Secondly, it is financially beneficial for Arbitrum - we will pay less to the main chain, since blobs have become cheaper to transfer
Thirdly, they fixed not only compatibility with Ethereum, but also a bug with Stylus, one of the advantages of Arbitrum
For Constitutional AIP, it is proposed to reduce the quorum from 5% to 4.5%.
The situation has developed that the number of tokens is growing more than the voting percentage
The last Constitutional vote took place only after an additional voting period (+2 days), but 243.89M out of a quorum of 210.74M voted, so the voting reserve was more than 33 million ARB
However, this decision is one of the worst that exists, since by the time this proposal is accepted, the quorum will increase even more and it will be necessary to vote for another reduction in the quorum percentage.
There are several other options, one like in Uniswap - to delegate the required number of tokens to top delegates (also a controversial decision, but at least it does not need any changes), and it can be done better than in Uniswap, namely, to delegate the required number of tokens only if the quorum has not been met.
The second solution is staking, which has not been launched for six months and which would solve the problem of apathy of ARB token owners
While the second solution takes time, the first one is easy to implement right now.