OCL events team choosing the specific industry events should have been revealed in the original proposal. This is not the way for a DAO to choose its own event strategy. I bet the Arbitrum DAO would have chosen different events if it was asked properly.
and therefore I feel like this proposal is yet another move for OCL and AF to get more money from the DAO, for things that they already got money to do previously… especially with the recent 250M ARB proposal looking to pass
This proposal is not a DAO events budget for 2025. It is the budget for OCL and AF to spend on events that they organize, and a way for that budget to come from the DAO instead of their own balance sheet.
After this proposal passes, it will be even more difficult for an independent service provider (like Hack Humanity for example) to propose an event or series of events to Arbitrum DAO, because the budget will be capped for the year, and because OCL and the AF will have a say on whether those events should get funded, instead of the Arbitrum DAO. Of course anybody can still go outside this budget and propose a specific event to the Arbitrum DAO, but that will be looked down upon because it will automatically be seen as not being in sync with what OCL and AF thinks should be funded events for Arbitrum DAO.
So… maybe you should rename this proposal to “OCL and AF request for funds for 2025 events, with oversight by Disruption Joe and Entropy Advisors”
So in its current shape, I will be voting against this proposal.
I would vote for if there was an actual plan to figure out what should be the event strategy for Arbitrum DAO, that was bottoms up and created by the broader community, not by OCL and AF. And I even think @DisruptionJoe is the right person to lead that sense-making and discovery process of figuring out what events should the Arbitrum DAO participate in, sponsor, and fund, in a given year.
Hey Paulo! Thank you for the comment, but it seems you misunderstood the proposal. We’d like to specifically clarify a few of the points you made:
The purpose of this proposal is not to establish a comprehensive DAO events strategy, but rather set aside a budget for events. The OCL events team was not responsible for choosing the specific industry events. This decision was made by the quoted group - Entropy, ADPC, and Disruption Joe - after a conversation with the OCL events team to better understand their 2025 plans.
In terms of this being a proposal to bolster funds for the AF/OCL, we do not see it this way. Rather these funds can be seen as a way to bolster Arbitrum’s presence at top events. As L2beat pointed out above, OCL and the AF are the two entities that have the best understanding for how the Arbitrum vision/brand should be represented. While a bottom ups approach works quite well for smaller events such as community meetups, producing a large scale event requires significant planning, coordination, boots on the ground for day of production, and a deep understanding of Arbitrum’s current needs. This is a full-time, top-down role (ie. an events coordinator) that the DAO does not currently have the ability to procure/employee. However, as written in the proposal, we expect the DAO to be better equipped to take a more proactive role on events once OpCo has been established.
OCL and the AF will have absolutely no say in whether an event brought forward by an independent service provider should get funded. By setting aside an events budget, it actually shortens the timeline required for an events provider to come to the DAO with an idea, as they do not need to go through the lengthy Tally process. For example, this was a massive issue for Hack Humanity, which forced their team to front funds to organize GovHack in Brussels without knowing for sure they would be reimbursed. Overall, this proposal would make it easier for service providers to propose large events outside of the current Questbook rails ($50k maximum).
After further consideration and taking into account the outcome/discussion from the ArbitrumDAO Off-site Snapshot, the quoted group has decided to remove the planned delegate offsite at Token2049 Dubai. This will leave more funds available for ecosystem growth events. Delegate offsites can still be proposed by individuals or event service providers and pull funds from the established budget.
The proposal has been updated to reflect this change and is also now live on Snapshot for a temperature check.
It’s necessary to establish an event budget in advance for 2025 since the DAO has just approved a proposal for offline events. However, the question is, did we participate in these events mentioned for 2024, and what were the expenses and outcomes? I didn’t see clear data in the proposal. Without this information, how was the $1.5 million budget for this proposal determined? I’m puzzled by this figure, and this is a key issue we often encounter when it comes to budget-related proposals—we don’t know whether the amount is too much or too little. Therefore, I believe the proposer should provide supplementary data on the 2024 activities for the delegates’ reference.
With the primary proposal + changes I want to show my overall support.
As a Dao, our goal is to, generically, evolve and get better. While this concept is abstract, from a pragmatic pov it means filling the gaps we have and remove friction.
One of the biggest friction we have is what is in between good proposals from good contributors vs the final outcome; often times than not this is about having not only a budget, but a budget by a certain date. With the previous even we saw that you need to move with weeks and sometimes months in advance, and the event budget will likely remove this friction (same as the treasury initiative to have a certain amount of stables, in our pocjets, will allow to remove friction from programs that requires a usd denominated budget; OT here, I know, but to me it has the same overarching goal of removing friction).
Setting aside funds for events helps Arbitrum stay active in the most important crypto spaces, which keeps the community growing and engaged. I also believe, that involving the AF and OCL helps unify the community and prevents conflicting events. It really brings people together and keeps everyone on the same page, which makes the Arbitrum community way stronger. @Entropy I appreciate you keeping us updated on any changes.
I voted against, as I think the amount is pretty high for those events and I would rather like to see one event being planned and learn from it before trying do organize so many.
I’m voting FOR this proposal on Snapshot. Building a consistent presence at major crypto conferences has huge potential to boost Arbitrum’s visibility in the industry. Plus, I really like the idea of allowing any DAO member to propose events.
I’m voting for. I fully support the idea of having an already-established budget for DAO events. Running these events generally brings benefits and good outcomes for the DAO in terms of community engagement, knowledge sharing, visibility and innovation. I’m sure that establishing a budget for 2025 will allow us to be more responsive to event opportunities, and making it easier to take part in them, without being slowed down by the approval process that sometimes takes too long. This will certainly bring more flexibility.
I voted FOR in the Snapshot vote. It makes sense to have a north star when planning for events, and this proposal sets it. An important fact here is that there is room for service providers to engage and add value, making it more cost-effective. Interested to see if that will be the case.
We are in support of this proposal overall. Bby establishing a dedicated budget we can streamline DAO participation in key events, crucial for keeping up visibility, collaboration, and helps grow the community.
Involving the Arbitrum Foundation and Offchain in the planning and execution process, is good to align with the broader ecosystem’s goals and the inclusion of the measurable KPIs also adds transparency and accountability. We like the touch of allowing any DAO member to propose events that fit within this budget
Some overall questions:
What metrics or KPIs will be used to measure the success of these events? People? tweets? etc?
Interested in how sponsor partnerships and possible COI issues will be handled
Events always go over budgets from our understanding haha, is there a contingency plan or buffer if this happens?
Voting “For”, while I don’t attend these events I do realize the importance of them. And like we’ve done with other parts of the DAO I think it’s valuable to have some type of planned strategy regarding DAO events that aren’t just voting on projects as they organically come up. I think this should help us plan future events better.
Editing for Space: For my Tally vote, I will be maintaining my rationale as noted above. While I won’t be attending events, I hope everyone who does gets the most they can out of them!
I voted FOR this proposal at the temp check stage. Events are one of the few paid channels available for reaching the core crypto audience. The Arbitrum DAO should have a strong presence at every major Ethereum event. I’ve run an events program at an $200M ARR software company, so I have a reasonably informed view on costs, and $1.5M is a reasonable annual budget for an organization of Arbitrum’s scale.
The proposal for budget is good as it sets a clear direction for Arbitrum DAO’s 2025 event, which will help accelerate community collaboration. Although most DAO members won’t be able to participate in the in-person events, these gatherings can effectively enhance the influence of the DAO community.
While the $1.5M budget is necessary, further clarification on the allocation details will be needed in the future to ensure every dollar is used transparently and effectively.
Voted For: Events are one of the most important channels for addressing our community. They also bring new users, projects, and developers to join Arbitrum. As leaders in the Ethereum ecosystem, we should have a very strong presence at as many events as possible. I understand that these things take time and require a lot of funds, but I think it’s worth it. Having a strategy and budget like this is a huge step in the right direction. It’s much better than the rest of our industry, where things are often decided ad hoc. Great proposal, and I support it.
The proposal and many comments highlight the crucial role events play in building the Arbitrum community, attracting developers and users, fostering collaborations, and raising awareness for the ecosystem
Enhanced Efficiency and Flexibility
Earmarking funds for events allows the DAO to move quickly on opportunities and secure better pricing from service providers by streamlining the approval process
Addressing Existing Gaps
The proposal seeks to fill the gap in the DAO’s current approach to events
While the Questbook program supports smaller events, there’s a lack of a structured plan for larger, strategic initiatives
Collaboration and Alignment
The revised proposal emphasizes collaboration with the Arbitrum Foundation and Offchain Labs, ensuring that the DAO’s events complement existing efforts and work towards a unified strategy
Community Involvement and Oversight
The proposal maintains a balance between community-driven event proposals and responsible fund management
The use of a multi-sig wallet, the requirement for post-event impact reports, and the involvement of multiple entities in the approval process provide oversight and accountability
Points of Concerns
Budget Concerns
Would like the budget to be revised down significantly, especially considering the estimate of major event costs are under $500,000. Something like $1M seems more reasonable.
The limited information on specific event costs makes it difficult to assess whether the budget is truly justified
Potential for Ineffective Spending
There’s a risk that the pre-approved budget could lead to less rigorous evaluation of event proposals
Without a clear methodology for prioritizing events and assessing their potential ROI, the funds might be used for events that don’t deliver significant value
Some cost cutting and clearer cost breakdown/estimation would be appreciated in the tally proposal.
We’re supporting this proposal because having a dedicated event budget will allow the DAO to move faster and make the most of event opportunities without getting held up by the usual approval process. Events are crucial for building community. Many great initiatives have come from delegates who attended these events, leading to valuable collaborations.
I support this proposal and overall it is a great opportunity to drive expansion and growth of the DAO ecosystem.
Rationale: It provides DAO with greater flexibility in event planning and the opportunity to execute efficiently, especially with a more rationalized event budget and governance process.
Recommendations:
1. Clearer KPI setting: It is recommended to set clearer and quantifiable KPIs before each event in order to measure the actual results.
2. Transparent communication mechanism: After the implementation of each activity, update the progress on a regular basis to maintain the transparency of the community.
3. Expand participation opportunities: Encourage more developers and contributors to participate through the RFP process to increase the diversity and impact of activities.
There have been a lot of proposals on this before, and it would be nice to have an overall budget guide!
Voting in favor, as I believe that delegate participation is crucial for maintaining their engagement. Additionally, having a presence at major events is essential. I would also like to see more detailed budget breakdowns and KPIs from both past and proposed events