Delegate Incentive Program Results (MARCH 2024)

We are proud to announce the initial outcomes of the Delegate Incentive Program. After completing the first month of the program, we can now share both results and conclusions with the Arbitrum ecosystem.

:white_check_mark: March Participants

For the March program, 40 participants enrolled, out of which 38 met the necessary requirements to qualify.

You can see the full list here.

:gear: Parameters Breakdown

:yellow_circle: Snapshot Voting

During the month there were a total of 11 Snapshot Votations, which were considered for the assignment of scores by SV, it is important to note that only those proposals that ended in March were counted. These are the proposals that were taken into account:

  1. [Non-constitutional] Proposal to fund Plurality Labs Milestone 1B(ridge)
  2. ARDC Research Member Election
  3. ARDC DAO Advocate Election
  4. ARDC Security Member Election
  5. ARDC Risk Member Election
  6. [Non-Emergency Action] Fix Fee Oversight ArbOS v20 “Atlas”
  7. Request for Continuation of the Arbitrum DDA Program Request
  8. [Non-Constitutional AIP] Front-end interface to force transaction inclusion during sequencer downtime
  9. Catalyze Arbitrum Gaming: HADOUKEN!
  10. Expand Tally Support for the Arbitrum DAO
  11. Double-Down on STIP Successes (STIP-Bridge)

:large_blue_circle: Tally Voting

Also, for this month there were a total of 2 Tally Votations that were considered for TV scoring, it is important to note that only those proposals that ended in March were counted. These are the proposals that were considered.:

  1. AIP: ArbOS 20 “Atlas” - Arbitrum Support for Dencun + Batch Poster Improvements
  2. [Non-constitutional] Proposal to fund Plurality Labs Milestone 1B(ridge)

:green_circle: Communication Rationale

For the CR, the published rationals of all the votes of the month were considered, taking into account Snapshot and Tally, that is to say that to obtain the maximum qualification in this aspect a delegate had to express his rational of all the votes of the month, in other words 13 (11 snapshots + 2 tallys).

To know more about CR:

:orange_circle: Commenting in proposals (7 CPs)

It is important to clarify that for this parameter, only the number of Snapshots in the month is counted (11 in total for March), given that most of the debate is centered during the Snapshot period and not so much in tally. Because of this, theoretically a delegate would have to have commented on 11 proposals to get the maximum score for this parameter. However, during this month there were 4 proposals which were ARDC member elections, where it was not necessary to comment, these proposals are:

  1. ARDC Research Member Election
  2. ARDC DAO Advocate Election
  3. ARDC Security Member Election
  4. ARDC Risk Member Election

Given this situation and understanding that it does not make sense to comment in this case, we decided to remove these proposals for the calculation of the final score assigned by CP, which means that to obtain the maximum score by CP, a delegate had to comment in 7 proposals.

To know more about CP:

:memo: March Results

All data of interest was collected from March 2024 delegates and these were the results:

You can see the dashboard with the results implemented by karma here.

Of all the participating delegates, 25 were eligible to receive compensation.

Delegate Address Snapshot Profile Tally Profile PARB
Bob-Rossi 0xb29A655f3D67B2B6724Fb22B2C2303cB660c946B LINK Bob Rossi Profile 4.792,86
L2BEAT 0x1B686eE8E31c5959D9F5BBd8122a58682788eeaD LINK Profile L2beat 4.746,70
mcfly 0xAfD5f60aA8eb4F488eAA0eF98c1C5B0645D9A0A0 LINK mcfly profile 4.685,66
Savvy DeFi 0x4f54Cab19B61138e3c622a0bD671C687481eC030 LINK Savvy DeFi Profile 4.674,63
cp0x 0x6f9BB7e454f5B3eb2310343f0E99269dC2BB8A1d LINK cp0x Profile 4.650,00
TreasureDAO 0x0eB5B03c0303f2F47cD81d7BE4275AF8Ed347576 LINK TreasureDAO Profile 4.621,38
PrincetonBlockchain 0x18BF1a97744539a348304E9d266aAc7d446a1582 LINK PrincetonBlockchain Profile 4.485,71
404 DAO 0xe93d59cc0bcecfd4ac204827ef67c5266079e2b5 LINK 404 Profile 4.351,14
UADP 0x8326D18edfC50B4335113C33b25116ec268FF3fE LINK UADP Profile 4.324,68
MaxLomu 0xd333Bc5c9670C9cEb18f9A2CF02C6E86807a8227 LINK MaxLomu Profile 4.286,26
DAOstewards 0xd4879f876eE383067F80ACAdBE283B93141908e9 LINK DAOstewards 4.182,92
BristolBlockchain 0x43D3938Ebd74106e2d177f9A304C1E9f914f2b52 LINK BristolBlockchain Profile 4.100,00
StableLab 0xea172676E4105e92Cc52DBf45fD93b274eC96676 LINK StableLab Profile 3.903,85
Ruslan Klinkov 0xC3e8aC233f02d13C1E299e47aE230C205E0177Ed LINK Ruslan Profile 3.898,35
Frisson 0xb5B069370Ef24BC67F114e185D185063CE3479f8 LINK Frisson Profile 3.830,17
Michigan Blockchain 0x13BDaE8c5F0fC40231F0E6A4ad70196F59138548 LINK Michigan Blockchain Profile 3.791,21
HiringDevs.eth 0x22aA1F4173b826451763EbfCE22cf54A0603163c LINK hiringdevs.eth Profile 3.589,51
Premia (DK) 0xAD16ebE6FfC7d96624A380F394cD64395B0C6144 LINK Premia (DK) Profile 3.563,19
Griff Green 0x839395e20bbB182fa440d08F850E6c7A8f6F0780 LINK Griff Green Profile 3.486,71
Gauntlet 0x11cd09a0c5B1dc674615783b0772a9bFD53e3A8F LINK Gauntlet Profile 3.485,66
GFXLabs 0xa6e8772af29b29B9202a073f8E36f447689BEef6 LINK GFX Labs Profile 3.406,99
Kuiqian.eth 0xf3FE8c6c75bE4afB2F8200Fc77339abE4D7CFF33 LINK Kuiqian Profile 3.231,27
olimpio 0xF4B0556B9B6F53E00A1FDD2b0478Ce841991D8fA LINK olimpo Profile 3.220,28
Djinn 0xBF122Ac9eE2cDd537fe404ADe218159051Ba9455 LINK Djinn Profile 3.128,30
BlockworksResearch 0xA5dF0cf3F95C6cd97d998b9D990a86864095d9b0 LINK BlockworksResearch Profile 3.042,93
TOTAL 99.480,35

:medal_sports: Bonus Points

For the month of March there were certain proposals that were candidates for the allocation of Bonus Points, which are:

These proposals were reviewed in detail in order to comply with the rules expressed in this thread, where we clarify that:

Based on the above and after the review, we conclude that the only proposal that meets the necessary requirements for the allocation of Bonus Points is:

The evaluation rubric for BP assignment is as follows:

As it can be visualized, the final result was 24%, which will be the BP assigned to the creator and contributors of the proposal, which were:

Of these 3, only 2 are currently part of the program, so BP will be assigned only to these individuals.

:trophy: March 2024 Delegates Compensation

As mentioned above, the chosen delegates are these ones. The following are the general costs of the program

:moneybag: Costs

The program has several costs associated with it. These are:

Incentives to delegates (MARCH)

According this the results presented before the total cost destined to the delegates will it be 92.770,33 ARB

Karma: 0xc98786d5a7a03c1e74affcb97ff7ef8a710da09b

Multisig Members: 0xff1f38f8cDae7C1B1B289FCF6f5C1AA234DF1443

  • Payment 1 :
    • 0xd333Bc5c9670C9cEb18f9A2CF02C6E86807a8227 - 1k ARB Pending
    • 0xA9D2BCF3AcB743340CdB1D858E529A23Cef37838 - 1k ARB Pending
    • 0xb5B069370Ef24BC67F114e185D185063CE3479f8 - 1k ARB Pending
    • 0x1de39f894c2DC773C8A11862F58165EcC7611C91 - 1k ARB Pending
    • 0xAD16ebE6FfC7d96624A380F394cD64395B0C6144- 1k ARB Pending

SEED Latam: 0xcCC2E9551C143b3295f90A096E75C68E07415843

  • Payment 1: Pending
    • SEEDLatam: 3.333 ARB

:newspaper: Summary Table

By the date of April 3, 2024 this is the corresponding table:

Costs Type Status Tx ARB
Delegate Incentives MARCH PAYMENT Pending - 92.770,33
Multisign Members PAYMENT 1 Pending - 5.000,00
Karma PAYMENT 1 Done Karma 1 10.000,00
Karma PAYMENT 2 Done Karma 2 10.000,00
SEED Latam PAYMENT 1 Pending - 3.333,00
SUBTOTAL 121.103,33

Note: After the on-chain execution of payments, we will present the total settlement for the month of March.

:mag_right: Observations and Special Considerations

These are some of the cases or situations that arose while collecting data from the delegates. It may not be the best way to solve it but we will continue to work to give a better solution to these situations. We are open to feedback.

:star: ARDC Elections special case BlockworksResearch.

This month ARDC elections were held. This represents a big percentage of march’s Snapshot votings. This votations lacked the option ‘ABSTAIN’. So, some delegates expressed that they will not-cast their votes.

One of these delegates was BlockworksResearch, expressing its concerns about this situation. After analyzing it, to solve this situation and prevent making changes on the karma dashboard that might be very complicated to executed, we decided to give an additional score as Bonus Points to those delegates that abstained to vote of the following 4 snapshots:

It is important to mention that voting in all snapshots of the months represents the 15% of the final score that a delegate can get each month. In this particular month there were 11 snapshots voting in total.

If we make basic math (Rule of Three) :

11 Snapshot --------------------- 15 % of SV

1 Snapshot --------------------- X = 1,3636 of SV%

And, if we consider the 4 Snapshots mentioned above:

1,3636 of SV% x 4 Snapshots = 5,4545 %

So this 5,4545 % is the bonus points that will be added to those delegates that abstained from voting on the ARDC Snapshots and expressed it in the forum.

Of all delegates that form part of the program, only 1 delegate indicated that it would abstain.

So this 5,4545 % will be added as BP to @BlockworksResearch

Even this is not the ideal solution, our approach is that delegates participate in these votes by standing by their convictions. To avoid this in the near future, we will ensure that the ballots have the necessary options for delegates to express their voting intentions.

:family_woman_woman_girl_boy: New members of the program

As we said in previous posts, any delegate can apply to the program anytime.

In fact, we have some new participants that will be part of it from the next month (APRIL):

:police_car: Security Council Elections

When the proposal was written, security council elections were not considered. However, we believe that this is a vital process in which delegates should actively participate. We are therefore working with Tally (frisson) and Karma (Mahesh) to correctly count the votes from these elections and integrate them into the accounting for the following months.

When we have news we will communicate them in the forum.

:handshake: Karma Highlights

As we communicated in this post, for the CR (Communication Rationale) and CP (Commenting in proposals) parameters, we are still working to automate the counting of these parameters for the following months of the program.

In collaboration with Seed Latam, Karma has been dedicated to developing the delegate compensation dashboard, aiming to enhance transparency and insight into delegate activities. The efforts have addressed several challenges and introduced key updates:

  • Handling On-chain Voting Complexities: The process of calculating accurate lifetime voting percentages for delegates was complicated by numerous canceled or invalid proposals. Adjusting for these anomalies was essential for reliability.

  • Standardizing Voting Rationale Documentation: The absence of a uniform method for delegates to report their voting rationale—spread across proposal threads, delegate communication threads, and Snapshot—posed a significant challenge. Karma employed AI (Large Language Models) to efficiently extract these rationales from forum posts, streamlining administrative workflows.

  • Archiving Delegate Activities: To ensure transparency and provide a historical perspective, Karma has begun archiving snapshots of all delegate activities, allowing for the review of monthly statistics by any interested party.

We are continuing to make more updates to provide even more granular information. If you have any questions, concerns or feedback regarding the dashboard, contact the Karma team on Telegram, Discord or Email.

SEED Latam was in charge of collecting the CR and CP parameters manually for the moment.

:identification_card: KYC Process Requirement

All delegates listed in this table must complete the KYC by sending an email to compliance@arbitrum.foundation. We have been contacted by the DM of the forum all these delegates who met the requirements for compensation.

:rotating_light: [CALL TO ACTION!] Dispute Period

As stated in the proposal, delegates have 2 days to express their disagreement with the results presented by the Incentive System Administrator.

However, as this is the first iteration of the program, delegates will have more time to dispute, which will depend on the completion of the KYC processes managed by the Arbitrum Foundation.

To raise a dispute, delegates should do so by posting a message in the forum using the following template:

Title: Dispute

User name

Reason for dispute (please detail)

:man_student: :woman_student: Conclusions

We are glad to present these results to all the members who participated, as it shows the hard work done by the Karma and SEED Latam teams. We would also like to thank those delegates whose feedback contributed to the improvement of this program.

There were many challenges that emerged as the month progressed, but fortunately thanks to Karma’s commitment and professionalism, they were solved.

For our part, SEED Latam is committed to manually tracking the data for the month in order to double-check the results presented by karma.

The biggest challenge was the part of the Communication Rationales and Commenting in proposals, in which the collection of this data was done manually. Here you can see all the information related to CP and CR.

You can review this table in more detail here.

A total of 25 delegates will receive incentives for this month, which represents an improvement in participation compared to the results presented during the tests #1, #2 y #3.

The incentive program only makes sense if there is participation, so we would like to invite those who are not yet part of the program to have the opportunity to be included in the program. You can submit an application here.

Also if you want to give any feedback, you can do it in this thread.

:people_hugging: Additional Gratitudes

We would like to mention certain individuals and organizations that helped us during the month, which from our perspective, deserve our thanks.

To @Frisson for his support and help on issues related to resolving bugs with Tally.

To Karma (@mmurthy) for their dedication, commitment and quick response on this program, with which we have had numerous meetings to solve problems that appeared at the moment.

To the Arbitrum Foundation (@cliffton.eth and @raam) for their support related to the KYC process.

12 Likes

guys, i have a 54k voting power, not 45k!

don’t belittle my importance in the DAO :sweat_smile:

1 Like

Hey, thanks for noticing. It’s fixed now!

2 Likes

I carefully read the relevant content, for non-English-speaking proxy voting representatives, really need to spend a lot of time to study the intention of each proposal, the effect, but can see the effect of all the work of the person refinement, in order to better participate in the future proposal, will be active in expressing my personal views. I will actively participate in voting for my proxy. Thank you for your work.

1 Like

Hello, @SEEDGov
Tell me, when will the transactions for delegates be completed based on the results of March?

Will you send individually or do you want to wait until everyone passes the KYC and only then send the batch?

1 Like

1m

Hi! We’re working with Arbitrum Foundation for that. We need all delegates to finish their KYC process and only then payments can be released.

We’re working for that to be as soon as possible!

4 Likes

And the last question.
Do you have deadline?
I’m asking because the incentive program allows everyone to provide KYC even in a month-two

1 Like

In this first iteration we will try to execute all payments, our expectation is to do it before the 15th of this month.

3 Likes

In most regions of the planet, April 15 has already ended. Tell me, what are your expectations about deadline?

2 Likes

Hi, we are waiting for the Foundation to confirm the completion of the KyC to release the payments

1 Like

Apparently, the Foundation is pretty swamped with a bunch of things right now, so it’s taking a bit longer than usual to get things done.
But from what I’ve heard, it sounds like we should be getting an update on the KYC process soon soon.

2 Likes

Appreciate the report. Very well structured.

3 Likes