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.
While L2BEAT is also the DAO Advocate for the ARDC, we’re also delegates in Arbitrum DAO and we want to make it absolutely clear that the below reflects our opinion in our capacity as delegates and not as the DAO Advocate.
As Umami Finance STIP application was flagged in the ARDC Research Member STIP analysis as one requiring additional investigation from delegates, we would like to challenge the bridge application so that delegates can form their opinion on whether the DAO should approve or reject additional funding for their inventive program.
We would like to emphasize that our posting of the challenge is not a statement as to whether or not this application should be funded, but merely an administrative act to solicit delegate input. We encourage Umami Finance to respond to the comment in the ARDC analysis and provide further clarification on the effectiveness of their incentive program.
Below we quote the mentioned comment:
The oARB incentive mechanism could be seen as Umami selling ETH for ARB by some. Treasury generated ~45K ARB from deploying liquidity within the ecosystem. These funds were used to increase Umami’s vault emissions post-STIP. This seems to have been successful as Umami is one of the few protocols that has maintained/increased its TVL from what was reached during the STIP. Had somewhat of an advantage compared to most other STIP recipients because of the additional grant from GMX. In the Bridge application, doesn’t directly address the possible ethical concerns connected to the oARB mechanism, but has changed the incentivisation strategy to directly distribute tokens.