I will vote in favor during the temp check stage, as I believe it makes sense to have a pre-approved budget for 2025 events.
Some feedback and things I would like to see in the proposal before Tally:
An objective set of criteria to define the events that will be prioritized. I like that the DAO is being opened up to propose events. I’d love to see an event in LATAM, and I’m more than willing to help if there’s interest.
Clearly defined goals and KPIs for the events. If we start measuring success metrics, we will be able to compare the success of different events and potentially adjust the strategy to meet or exceed the goals in future years.
In this regard, and related to the previous point, I’d also like each event to clearly define its target audience. How will the strategy be shaped based on this?
Lastly, since the proposal includes members who are not from Entropy, I would like to see a disclosure of the compensation they will receive, as well as their tasks and KPIs for those roles.
voting Against the current offchain proposal because I think the $1.5M USD annual budget is too short, the event strategy was not decided in a bottoms-up way by the DAO, and because the Arbitrum Foundation already has their own events budget that they spend at their own discretion which is roughly 10 times this amount so they should not have a say in this committee as to which events should be funded.
We’re voting AGAINST the 2025 DAO events funding proposal.
We appreciate the effort put into crafting this proposal. DAO events have merit, but timing is key. Given the current token price concerns and substantial AF and OCL event investments, allocating an additional $1.5M now feels excessive. Let’s revisit this idea after gauging the impact of our recent initiatives funded in h1 24. Overall, we think a measured approach to spending aligns better with our delegate responsibility in these market conditions.
The following reflects the views of the Lampros Labs DAO governance team, composed of @Blueweb, @Euphoria, and Hirangi Pandya (@Nyx), based on our combined research, analysis, and ideation.
We are voting FOR this proposal.
It is important for Arbitrum to be present at key industry events. In the past, events like GovHack have played a vital role alongside those managed by the Foundation. However, we’ve observed that the 4-week confirmation time has caused last-minute rushes for proposals, which this well-planned budget should help avoid.
We trust ADPC, Disruption Joe, and Entropy to smoothly transition the responsibility of organizing these events to the OpCo once it is fully operational.
Before we move to Tally, we have one point that needs clarification. Regarding the service providers, will they need a Snapshot vote to get funds approved by the DAO, or will members be able to approve the funds directly? Understanding this process will help ensure third-party providers stay motivated to organize events for the DAO.
Overall I support this proposal, the last few event proposals were very difficult to coordinate though the DAO and having a committee dedicated to it would make more sense.
While I want to cut spending, marketing and coordinating at events is probably worth it.
It is a smart move to keep Arbitrum visible at key industry events. And I actually like the idea of having presence at a BTC event. The oversight from Entropy, ADPC, and Disruption Joe is solid, and I appreciate that unused funds go back to the DAO.
I would prefer that the group hold ARB until it is spent, even if it was allocated 10M ARB, for exchange rate risk, that would be better than selling all the ARB now and then holding stables to see if it is spent.
But I do support this effort and wish it had happened earlier so that maybe we could have had GovHack in Devcon!
We support the program to introduce the coordination help from the knowledgable members and the allocated budget with clear guidelines and procurement process as we value the importance of having DAO-led events for Arbitrum and opportunities for delegate gatherings.
I have no strong opinion about the amount; if at some point it’s not enough and we measure and understand that it adds value, I’m sure the DAO could consider extending it.
On the other hand, I like the idea that DAO members can propose their own events and KPIs.
I think it’s good that both the Foundation and the DAO can support this effort; the mission of growing the Arbitrum ecosystem ultimately belongs to both parties.
I’m excited that these conversations are happening ahead of time, especially because we’re taking previous learnings and starting to work towards improvements. Well done!
The following reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking, and ideation of the two.
We’re voting FOR the proposal.
We have been discussing this proposal with Entropy and other stakeholders for quite some time. We’re happy to see our previous feedback incorporated into the version currently on Snapshot, and we find the overall direction taken to be the right one.
We’ve seen a surge in demand for events for the DAO to enhance delegate discussion and DAO participation. It’s obvious that this is what the DAO desires, and we would like to see structured parties help bring this idea into fruition. Our concerns have been stated by other delegates and addressed by Entropy already as well.
It would have been better to present a more detailed analysis on the way funds will be spent, but I’m optimistic about these updates being as transparent as possible. Voted for.
There are so many positives to establishing this event budget for 2025 from streamlining decision-making to creating opportunities for onboarding new projects into the ecosystem. Plus, we really like that OCL and the Foundation would play a major role in how they are structured.
After consideration, the @SEEDgov delegation has decided to vote “FOR” on this proposal at the Snapshot vote.
Rationale
We had the opportunity to provide feedback to @Entropy privately during one of our bi-weekly meetings, and we would like to take this opportunity to share it here on the forum.
It would be good to evaluate the impact that these events will have on the ecosystem with a kind of process similar to the evaluation to give a grant. In Questbook, specifically in the Education, Community Growth and Events domain, we try to put a lot of emphasis on having good budget breakdowns, KPIs, and deliverables, as it is a very efficient way to guarantee that the budgeted prices have the best possible Quality/Price ratio. Additionally, we always try to include some activities such as a workshop or a hackathon with arbitrum as the main topic within these events.
We suggested changing the voting threshold in Snapshot to match that required for a non-constitutional on-chain vote (3% of the votable supply). This feedback was incorporated into the final version.
We emphasized that in programs like this one (as well as in the Questbook domain mentioned), it is extremely important to weigh regional diversity, as it allows Arbitrum DAO to gain visibility across the globe.
Additionally, we highlighted that the maximums in Questbook (currently $50k USD) should remain aligned over time with the minimums of this proposal.
We’re excited to see close to unanimous support for a 2025 Events Budget! We will be moving this proposal forward to Tally this week, with the vote beginning Thursday, October 31st.
We will also address a few of the additional questions that came up during the Snapshot period.
How was the $1.5m amount chosen?
There were differing opinions from delegates, with multiple individuals providing feedback that $1.5 was either too much or too little. An event’s cost can range widely depending on its scope, location, if it’s in-person/virtual, and targeted size. A comprehensive events strategy, which this proposal is not attempting to create, would be required to establish a more firm budget. $1.5m was derived from the following rationale:
In order to meaningfully increase Arbitrum’s presence at the 3 outlined events, somewhere between $250-400k would be required.
Based on the only event that has been fully funded by the DAO, GovHack Brussels ($309k allocated), the remaining ~$1.1m would be sufficient to fund at least ~3-4 additional events brought forward by contributors or service providers.
Again, we’d like to state that Entropy does not expect all $1.5m to be allocated, and since each event must be approved by a Snapshot vote, it is ultimately up to the DAO on how much it wishes to spend. If the $1.5m proves to be insufficient and the DAO deems the previously funded events as successful, additional funds can always be allocated.
Will the quoted group, the Arbitrum Foundation, or OCL have a say in the other events funded?
The 3 events specifically outlined in the proposal will lean heavily on OCL / the AF, but future proposals brought forth by service providers or contributors could have much less involvement from the aforementioned parties. We expect to lean on OCL / the AF to ensure there are no events that end up competing for mindshare as well as to align on general strategy/event goals, but unless the AF / OCL comes to the DAO requesting for additional funds from the DAO’s events budget herein, they will not have direct say in what does or does not get funded. They will be consulted by Entropy, Disruption Joe, and the ADPC to ensure alignment, but the DAO has the overarching decision making power. As stated in the proposal, any individual or events service provider can bring forward an event to the DAO and must have it approved by a Snapshot vote.
It is therefore ultimately up to the DAO to decide which events they want to prioritize over the course of 2025.
Bitcoin 2025: Las Vegas
We would like to be transparent in that compared to ETHDenver and EthCC, OCL has not yet provided confirmation Bitcoin 2025 will be included in their event’s strategy for next year. As stated in the proposal, the quoted group is committed to procuring a service provider and acting as the point of contact if necessary:
We will reiterate that it is our belief Bitcoin 2025 presents an opportunity for Arbitrum to grow its brand in an adjacent community, but if the quoted group determines that supporting/hosting an activation would be ineffective or wasteful, then the funds will be preserved for another future event opportunity.
KPIs, measurements of success, requirements for event proposers
As outlined in the proposal, individuals or services providers bringing forward an event idea are expected to include measurable KPIs and will be required to publish a retroactive impact report, which includes a breakdown of actual vs budgeted costs and important learnings for the DAO.
Entropy encourages delegates to hold specific event proposals to a high standard when it comes to measuring a given event’s impact and the expected budget’s level of detail.
In terms of measuring the success of the three outlined events, data points such as number of registrations, actual attendance, conversion rate of registrations to attendance, social media metrics, and overall Arbitrum social sentiment will be taken into account. Since these events are still in an early planning stage, it is not possible to give exact targets for these KPIs, but the ADPC, Disruption Joe, and Entropy will communicate this information to the DAO when it becomes available.
Compensation
The quoted members of this group are not receiving any additional compensation for their work in procuring service providers for events or interfacing with the Foundation/OCL event teams.
Establishing an Events Budget for 2025 is now pending for a vote on Tally. Funds will be first moved into a Foundation-controlled address, where the 4m ARB will be converted into $1.5m of stablecoins and then sent to an MSS-controlled address, with any excess ARB being returned to the DAO.
Please note that the Foundation has elected to use this address for the 4M ARB transfer upon this proposal’s passing, which was previously used to custody the funds from Entropy Advisor’s proposal. @stonecoldpat or another Arbitrum Foundation team member can provide confirmation that this is an AF controlled multi-sig.
Given that the Arbitrum DAO offsite proposal was rejected and there is no DAO event planned in Asia (Dubai 2049), I would like to request that Asia be considered as a formal location in next year’s budget. Although most delegates are based in Europe and Western countries, obtaining a visa can be challenging for those from Asia. I Think some delegates faced similar issues during GovHack in Brussels.
I think the Arbitrum DAO needs an event budget and it’s great 2 see this initiative!
I do feel that it only scratches the surface of the issue though.
Also resonate with this and believe the DAO should be able to decide which events it wants to prioritize.It’s a no brainer that the ones outlined in the proposal are clear YES-es, but how does the DAO decide on the others, which are prioritized and how? As I read the proposal I understand that these will be decided by centralized decision making which is efficient, but can sub-optimal from a coverage pov sometimes as it may be biased and based on the network of the entities involved(which is nothing wrong, it’s in fact natural), but leaves opportunities on the table that could also be leveraged as well.
There are multiple event organizers that have reached out to me after my involvement in Arb Daos presence at Eth Bucharest-which was the first event afaik where the Arbitrum Dao was present and not the Foundation( that’s how I met @paulofonseca@DisruptionJoe IRL and other delegates, contributors and Arbitrum whales).
Everyone kinda wants Arbitrum at their events, wants to be supported by Arbitrum, some even know about QB and have requested funding, but the main issue is there is no alignment between these types of events and Arbitrum in reality! Would be great if we could think about this, have some ideas in mind and am happy 2 discuss them and I bet others do as well.
There are multiple solutions that could be considered to allow the Arbitrum DAO to decide these things, one of them is QF, we can use QF to enable the DAO to decide how it wants 2 fund these events. Others that can to mind are Jokerace,
@ZER8 we’d like to point you to this part of the proposal that explains how other events are decided and prioritized:
It is ultimately up to the DAO to decide and vote on which events they want to prioritize over the course of 2025. A centralized body deciding event strategy is not part of this proposal and the quoted group is only responsible for procuring events service providers (if necessary) and interfacing with the Foundation & OCL event teams.
For example, as @Mehdi_eth highlighted, the removal of Token2049 Dubai means there are no events in Asia. There is now an opportunity for a contributor or service provider to bring forth an idea to the DAO for an event in Asia. While Entropy encourages delegates to hold the authors of such event proposals to a high standard, if its passes a Snapshot vote, then funds from the 2025 Events Budget can be allocated.
Also as a general reminder, an event that costs less than 50k should apply for funds through the Questbook domain. The funds allocated to the 2025 Events Budget should be reserved for large scale events.
since it is an Entropy-related proposal.