# Dedicated DAO Contributors: Enhancing live initiatives and driving key workstream **URL:** \ **Category:** Archived Proposals\ **Tags:** aip, proposal, proposal-discussions\ **Created:** [October 25, 2024, 3:55am UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/dedicated-dao-contributors-enhancing-live-initiatives-and-driving-key-workstream/27296 "2024-10-25T03:55:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 12
**Author:** ![pedrob](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/pedrob/32/15561_2.png) [@pedrob](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/pedrob)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2024, 12:39pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/dedicated-dao-contributors-enhancing-live-initiatives-and-driving-key-workstream/27296/12 "2024-10-28T12:39:19Z")
Hello! I have to admit, I’m a bit confused by the proposal. > [@AlexLumley](#): > > Builders are losing faith in the ecosystem due to slow DAO processes, unclear timelines, and lack of clarity or inconsistency of builder support. (OCL can’t keep up with growth!) If you have any statistics or further analysis on this, I’d love it if you could share! In my opinion, there has been a lot of support for builders (numerous past DAO incentive programs + grants from the AF + future incentive programs as Stylus and an incentives WG currently working on the new version of them), though I could be mistaken, and I would love a deeper understanding of this point. > [@AlexLumley](#): > > Contributors are disengaging because of unclear priorities, inefficient proposal updates, and a lack of transparent decision-making. I’d also appreciate it if you could expand on this with data or a report. In my opinion (although I don’t have data, just a sense from having been around for a while), the DAO seems to have more contributors over time. > [@AlexLumley](#): > > ### Governance Operations > > - Objective: Increase the success rate of DAO initiatives by improving accountability, communication, and workflows. How would you describe the success rate of the initiatives so far? Where do you consider you’d be starting, and where do you want to go? > [@AlexLumley](#): > > ### Workstream Stewardship > > - Objective: Design and implement governance processes that empower delegated authorities to manage strategic budgets. I don’t fully understand this. Is the idea that you would act as council supervisors? By this proposal, would all future councils operate under you? Or is the plan to create a council under your leadership that would then supervise the other councils? I’m a bit confused—apologies if I’m not getting it. > [@AlexLumley](#): > > or this proposal to be possible, we will also need to pass the workstream budget proposal. Here is the current [draft](https://docs.google.com/document/d/14iCpbq5DEQPLxr-RzRSWnLl5j4kElTaAbscXDrE8AEw/edit?usp=sharing). And why is it necessary to approve funds for an Orbit strategy for this proposal to pass? That part also has me confused. Thank you for the new proposal, though many of t[he questions I raised in the previous one haven’t been answered](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/boosting-dao-efficiency-by-10x-aligning-accountability-increasing-throughput/27051/12) > [@Boosting DAO Efficiency by 10x: Aligning Accountability & Increasing Throughput](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/boosting-dao-efficiency-by-10x-aligning-accountability-increasing-throughput/27051/12): > > What we are missing is a watchdog—someone who applies a certain level of “pressure” and oversees the execution of proposals, providing expert opinions on how things are progressing and recommending actions if something starts deviating from what was promised. The thing is that it’s a very unpopular role. But in my opinion, given the current state, this is exactly what the DAO needs today. And I would vote in favor of it. > > That said, I have a couple of questions about the execution of the proposal and the budget. > > Why do you think two people in a “senior” role (17K USD per month) are necessary to execute the proposal? Honestly, the pricing seems a bit excessive to me. It would be great if, beyond expressing your full-time commitment, you could explain a bit more about the rationale behind the number. > > Joe, apologies if you’ve posted or mentioned this somewhere before, but I couldn’t find any reference. Does this mean you’ve set aside the execution of [Plurality Labs milestones](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/proposal/21881347407562908848280051025758535553780110598432331587570488445729767071232?govId=eip155:42161:0x789fC99093B09aD01C34DC7251D0C89ce743e5a4) and the pluralistic grants? > > Lastly, I would like to know your thoughts on the compatibility of accessing this proposal while maintaining the [incentivized role as a delegate](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/delegate-incentive-program-results-september-2024/27066). My personal opinion: I believe the actions included in “Governance Operations” are valuable and necessary for the DAO. I would focus the proposal on that, ideally working together with Entropy to avoid overlap. Thank you very much. --- _[View the full topic](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/dedicated-dao-contributors-enhancing-live-initiatives-and-driving-key-workstream/27296)._