Extension of Arbitrum’s Short-Term Incentive Program

Grants Discussions
70

Thanks all for your replies. A couple of themes have emerged in the discussion, thank you all for the input - has been incredibly valuable and had many points that we had not thought of. The main one being how should the extension work?

We put together the discussion thus far and summarized some pros / cons.

  1. Option 1: Continue with round 2. Continue with the existing program structure where we hold a round 2, everyone from round 1 who had not qualified can retry in round 2. Supporters - @limes @DanThales @mint_cloud @deBridge

    Pros: Beneficial for projects who waited for round 2, Projects with >50% in favor votes + quorum but missed the 50m ARB cut-off get a second chance

    Cons: Projects with >50% in favor votes + quorum but missed the 50m ARB cut-off will have to canvass for votes again

  1. Option 2: Grant extension to round 1. Give out remaining ARB grant to the projects missing the cut-off with >50% in favor votes + quorum but missed the 50m ARB cut-off. Supporters - @teddy-notional @bflynn @blazedbison

    Pros: Projects with >50% in favor votes + quorum but missed the 50m ARB cut-off do not have to canvass for votes again

    Cons: Projects who waited for round 2 will likely not get a chance (there are 24m ARB worth of grant requests which will likely take up a significant proportion if not all of the extension)

  1. Option 3: Pro-rata distribution. Give out grants where Project grant = ( project vote * project request ) / sum ( all project votes * all grant requests ) * budget. Supporters - @Midgetwhale

    Pros: Better distribution of funds, not winner takes all

    Cons: If retroactive, changes the initially proposed rules, disbenefit to already selected grantees

Both Option 1 and 2 are viable options but we prefer Option 1, given that:

  • This will give a chance to projects who were waiting on round 2 a fair chance at application
  • It is also not all negative for projects with >50% in favor votes + quorum but missed the 50m ARB cut-off, since they will be getting a second chance, versus no grant currently.

We are generally not in favor of retroactively changing the rules, which rules out option 3.

That said, we prefer for the community to decide on the nature of extension and suggest the next steps for this is to proceed with a 2x temp check votes:

  • How much to extend STIP by?

    • Option 1: 10m ARB
    • Option 2: 20m ARB
    • Option 3: 30m ARB
    • Option 4: Abstain

  • How should the extension work?

    • Option 1: Continue with round 2
    • Option 2: Extended STIP grants to go to projects with >50% in favor votes + quorum but missed the 50m ARB cut-off
    • Option 3: Abstain

Following which, the final vote should be a combination of the above, for example:

  • Option 1: Extend the STIP by 20m ARB and continue with round 2
  • Option 2: Do not extend the STIP
14 Likes