Title: Dispute
Delegate name: jameskbh
I want to start by saying that my take on governance is to try to provide value in the processes & proposals where I can contribute to a better outcome.
I want to dispute the low score given to my comment on Entropy Advisors: Exclusively Working with the Arbitrum DAO, Y2-Y3 post. As my current understanding is that each evaluation focuses on the value added to a specific proposal, I base my case on that.
The current score is:
Relevance: 3
Depth of Analysis: 3
Timing: 3
Clarity & Communication: 3
Impact: 2
This score is on a scale from 1-10, and, AFAIK, it is correlated with the previous scale, from 1-4 (The picture below)
The current score (3s and 2s) would be the equivalent of (1 (low) and 2 (acceptable)) on the table above, as a means of comparison.
As my comment was:
- quoted by other delegates and helped to shape the change regarding an important part of the proposal;
- acknowledged as a notable contribution in the Delegate Feedback Reporting (image below);
I believe the current score does not reflect this reality, and the impact, relevance, depth of analysis and timing components of it should be reviewed.
Thanks in advance!