GovHack Devcon in Bangkok - Hack Humanity

[KlausBrave]

Abstract

GovHack
A lean, mean, highly optimised machine.

GovHack is a process, not an event.

When: Nov 8-10
Where: Bangkok

This 3rd iteration addresses the 2 primary critiques constraining maximal value generation from GovHack for ArbitrumDAO.

1. At root cause there is lack of process and opportunity for coordination and alignment for decision-making on vision, strategy, and top priority goals. This means less proposals hit the mark as they could, and new talent churns and is not retained.
2. Lack of dedicated post-GovHack support to comprehensively develop promising proposals that go the distance and make the difference the DAO needs at this moment in time.

This new version (v3) is

• Optimised to respect delegates’ time with tight specific sessions for them to participate and optional engagement in the open event programming as they wish.
• More condensed 2.5 day IRL event
• Total cost $156k ($146k+10k) contingency (vs $262k in Brussels). It is substantially cheaper to run the IRL component in Thailand.
• Enhance with a dedicated 4-week onramp and 4-week afterburner of online support.

We have been listening, gathering requirements, and are committed to reinventing GovHack as an ever evolving structure and process for what the DAO needs.

What’s emerged as central:

We must strike the right balance between exclusivity for effectiveness and inclusivity for fresh ideas.

Enter: GovHack

4-week Onramp (online)

• Core delegates topics prioritisation
• Mapathon
• Format and agenda finalisation
• Fair Core & Open participant criteria finalisation
• Enrol hackathon participants and secure pre-submission of proposals that may already be in progress

3-day in-person GovHack

Where: Bangkok
When: Nov 8-10

Day 1 - Arbitrum Core Day - existing key stakeholders deep engagement and strategic decision-making
Day 2 - Hackathon Day - fresh talent is activated to innovate on maximally aligned strategic goals for the DAO
Day 3 - Open Community Day - winning ideas are shared, ecosystem partners, existing DAO contributors and newcomers talk straight, what’s next, gameplan a coordinated path forward, how we win together.

4-week online Afterburner / Aftercare (online)

• Online PitStops
• Proposal mentorship
• Programme matchmaking

Miro diagrams: here

Motivation

Competition is fierce, attention is scarce, and mercenary capital is everywhere.
We must adapt, get organised and exercise strong leadership.

All major ecosystems are showing up strong and investing heavily.

Mantle $15.7m, Filecoin $19m, per event costs anywhere from $100k - $1m+, see: Blockchain Events Industry Market Research we have gathered.
Arbitrum Events spend between the Foundation ($5.6m), DAO, QuestBook is under $7m.
We are underspending comparatively.

There is a prime opportunity for Arbitrum to have a strong presence at Devcon as the leading, most mature, and capable DAO.
Let’s continue this tradition out in front to close 2024.

GovHack will achieve the dual goals of serving existing stakeholders’ highest needs at this time and showing a strong public face and opportunity for new talent to learn and get involved in the DAO.

Rationale

Why choose Hack Humanity

Running coordinated online + IRL activations in new countries under tight time frames is non-trivial.

1. Track Record executing 2 complex, successful and engaging events with challenging lead time (3.5 weeks, 4.5 weeks) and in new countries.
   1. GovHack Denver (NPS 67)
   2. GovHack ETHcc Brussels (NPS 83)
2. Facilitation expertise 2 senior and 2 intermediate level facilitators. Klaus has years at IBM facilitating strategic workshops, aligning exec stakeholders, and developing roadmaps. Ran a Brand Strategy consultancy for 2 years in London, defining organisation’s Vision, Mission, Values, and business models.
3. Fiscally Responsible: this event optimised to $156k
   1. Budget highly optimised to the essentials
   2. Transparent reporting on previous GovHack costs, and record of returning unused funds.
   3. For speed can reuse infrastructure already established, GovHack multi-sig, signers, oversight
4. We Are Ready. We are in position to execute
   1. 46 Bangkok venues already scouted, top 3 selections made, final quotes established with candidate venue. Ready to secure with downpayment.
   2. All team members confirmed. Experience senior team of facilitators and event production professionals that know Arbitrum and worked GovHack ETHcc event already.
   3. All suppliers identified, price estimates received, and supplier availability secured.

Specifications

Format engineered as dual-track for participants across:

• DAO Delegates
• Protocol representatives from various verticals
• Key Service Providers
• Arbitrum Foundation members
• Offchain Labs representatives
• Invited experts and advisors
• Fresh talent that is well-matched to create solutions against identified challenges

Format, indicative only to be refined in the coming 2 months, and open to the community’s feedback: here
Continuation of successful parts of the formula used for GovHack ETHDenver and ETHcc Brussels.

Steps to Implement

1. Event Planning
   • Develop detailed 3-day event agendas and session plans
   • Source and decide in advance the top focus areas, and partially developed high-value proposals that will be accelerated together at the in-person event
2. 4-week Onramp (online)
   • Core delegates topics prioritisation
   • Format and agenda finalisation
   • Mapathon
   • Fair Core & Open participant criteria finalisation
3. Logistics
   • Secure appropriate venues for each 3-day event
   • Arrange necessary equipment and suppliers
4. Participant Outreach and Confirmation
   • Co-develop criteria, identify and invite key stakeholders
   • Marketing, outreach, sourcing and agreement of GovHack track host roles
5. Event Execution
   • Facilitate Core Day, Hackathon and Open Community Days
6. Post-Event Follow-up and Implementation
   • Impact Report
   • Publish Media for full transparent visibility for global DAO member access
   • Run 4-week post GovHack support programme
   • Implement a robust follow-up process to track and support the implementation of event outcomes
7. Continuous Improvement
   • Conduct post-event surveys and interviews
   • Analyse success metrics and adjust future events accordingly

Costs

Will reuse the method and infrastructure from previous GovHack to handle payments with the existing multi-sig, 60% payment at the start of the project, 30% 1 week before the IRL event, 10% after event completion.

Full Budget breakdown: here
Total: $156k USD

Timeline

• September - Snapshot + Tally
• Oct - Nov: Prep and Organisation
• Nov 8-10: GovHack execution
• Nov - Dec: post GovHack followups, Impact Report & Media publishing.

Success Measures

Let’s build more success stories, together.

GovHack Denver produced:

• M&A
• Arbitrum Ventures
• Event Horizon

GovHack Brussels:

• DevRel Uni just passed, we will be training 60 dedicated Arbitrum DevRels
• Proposals.app proposal is being worked on

The success of the initiative will be measured by:

1. Number and quality of strategic decisions made during the Core event day
2. Progress on maturing and advancing high-impact proposals
3. Participant satisfaction and engagement measured through surveys and interviews (NPS)
4. The implementation rate of event outcomes in the following quarter (Core and new proposals passed)

Voting Options

For
Against
Abstain

Next Steps

The venue needs 70% down payment and is holding for 2 weeks.

Vote early to send a strong signal so we can ensure this happens over the next 8 weeks.

For questions, contact Klaus

• on the Forum
• or let’s speak in person at Token2049 in Singapore this week

[paulofonseca]

@KlausBrave

Participants will include:

• Arbitrum Foundation members
• Offchain Labs representatives
• DAO Delegates
• Key Service Providers
• Protocol representatives from various verticals
• Invited experts and advisors

how would these 60 to 80 key stakeholders get selected?

and look, this is a bit of a tongue in cheek kinda question to be honest… because I’m not even sure if an event where the participants are selected according to some criteria or in whatever manner, is a good idea for a DAO in the first place. I feel that it could easily become a self-serving event for that particular cohort of people that can find a way to get in the room, and not necessarily for the whole broader DAO.

so I believe we should start by recognizing that such an event format would concentrate immense power on it’s facilitators and organizers, particularly because they would be the ones that would get to choose the criteria through which, the attendees would get to attend, and also probably the matters being discussed. and sure, we could use some lazy criteria like “anybody that has more than ###k ARB voting power” or whatever, but I mean… no offense to the big delegates but that would be a very boring cohort of people to through up an event for =)

having said all of that, I do think that we might have the possibility to innovate a bit in here.
imagine that we would come up with some kind of contest to decide who gets to go to this event format, or some pairwise nomination system, or something else that we haven’t even thought of. The innovation that we should be striving for in DAOs is exactly on this issue of, how might we collectively decide who should be involved in what conversations and when, while still maintaining the openness and permissionless nature of DAOs as much as possible?

[Bruce]

The whole event is fabulous and all the details are crystal.
Here are two suggestions:
1. In the “Success Measures” part, could you give us a more quantifiable version, just like:

(1). Number and quality of strategic decisions made during the 3-day events

• Target: 10-15 high-priority decisions per event.
• Measured by follow-up actions implemented from these decisions within the next 3 months.

(2). Progress on maturing and advancing high-impact proposals

• Target: At least 5 proposals significantly advanced per event, with 2-3 fully ready for governance voting within 3 months.

(3). Participant satisfaction and engagement

• Target: Minimum 85% satisfaction score in post-event surveys.
• Engagement score based on active participation in all sessions.

(4). Implementation rate of event outcomes in the following quarter

• Target: 70% of strategic decisions and proposals made during the event to be executed or implemented within 3 months.

2. Have you ever considered the invitation of a small group of active users (7 or 10) to join the event even just as the audiences. you know, with broader community involvement.

[ostanescu.eth]

As a former GovHack Brussels participant, I salute the 12 months proposed structure. Having the GovHacks linked with flagship events dates makes a lot of sense, since a lot of people are already attending these conferences.

On the other hand, the focus change in regards to the stakeholder target group for this event might miss the general knowledge available in the DAO for example. A alternating model where 2 events focus on core stakeholders and 2 events are open for the active Arbitrum contributors might be a better fit. The active contributors can be those that have at least one proposal submitted to the DAO or through the service providers. This would prove that they are / were at some point active in the ecosytem. This is just an example.

All in all for me the GovHack Core proposal is well-structured, with a clear focus on deep engagement and strategic decision-making among existing stakeholders. It addresses key governance challenges within the Arbitrum ecosystem, offering a thoughtful approach to advancing high-priority proposals. However, the proposal could benefit from more consideration of inclusivity.

[ostanescu.eth]

One more question: Do I understand correctly that organizing something for Devcon is not actually feasible? I expect that a lot of people will be in Bangkok for Devcon and ETH Global.

Would be a great opportunity and it’s 4 months (more than 1Q) after the Brussels one.

I would be the first one to sign-up!

#LFG

[KlausBrave]

Thanks for your feedback @ostanescu.eth.

It’s our assessment on a yearly basis 1 event per quarter would be most effective, alternating 1 GovHack Core event, then 1 Open GovHack event.

The advantages are supportive and additive of each other, Core events maximise alignment and dual-track engagement with 1) core contributors and 2) Open events attract and grow top newcomer talent to ensure there is always fresh new dna of talent coming to the ecosystem.

Why a long-term proposal?

A long-term proposal provides a significant advantage to Arbitrum:

1. to secure GovHacks as a unique competitive advantage for Arbitrum for the next year
2. people can predictably plan their travel, fly in the required number of days earlier than each major conference
3. know year round all the key places to be to deepen IRL connections in the Arbitrm community
4. for HackHumanty to be able to book and secure the best venues for Arbitrum in advance
5. to be able to train and retain a dedicated, consistent high-context delivery team across 2024/2025 across 3 or more continents. This is non-trivial. In addition many conferences rotate the city they are held i.e. ETHcc, Devcon which requires continual adaptation. While there are generalisable principles in event programming, production and facilitation, there are always idiosyncrasies to be handled in the way every country and culture operates. This requires an organising team that’s adaptive and capable to research, plan, deploy and execute in many new operating environments.
   We have this proven capability with Hack Humanity.
6. a year long program allows tracking of longitudinal engagement, retention and proposal evolution and ROI
7. It solves the issue of limited time for planning and marketing that occurs by having to do the full Forum/Snapshot/Tally process every 3 months.
8. Personally, it’s a time and energy-intensive process doing one-off proposals every 3 months, and not a sustainable way of working as a service provider.

Regarding Devcon in Bangkok, the best dates I envisage are Nov 8-10. It can be done, it’s very tight though, it’s 9 weeks from now and the proposal process is 1 week on the forum, 1 week snapshot, 3 weeks Tally before funds are available, and most venues require at least 50-80% downpayment to secure the venue.

GovHack Denver was organised in 3.5 weeks, and GovHack ETHcc in 4.5 weeks.
It is doable I am in Bangkok right now and have hired a local event producer to research and scout venues already, we have a shortlist of candidate venues.

The main reason for the long-term proposal is to get out of this short-term crunch cycle of organising events with limited lead time in this manner. However, I’m willing to do this for Devcon, provided we get a yearly program in place so the following year of events have proper lead time for planning, marketing, and a sustainable way of working.

[jameskbh]

I think IRL events are necessary to better coordinate actions and planning of any DAO. I’m making these questions on both posts, to get a better understanding:

What are the main differences (in terms of the event itself) between this proposal and the Off-site one? - specially the “Core Series”

Both initiatives are targeting DevCon. Does it make sense to have both events?

Is there a way to merge both initiatives if they are complementary?

Thanks for the proposal!

[danielo]

Please see my answer here

Arbitrum Offsite format: online vs IRL

Thanks for the question @jameskbh I’m unsure why Hack Humanity decided to pivot away from focusing on gov hacks and make a proposal closer to what we have been working on. I think in essence both proposals are rather different, but it might not make sense to fund them both at this point in time. Where I see the difference: Objective: Hack Humanity requests funding for delivering events and a yearly salary for Klaus, where the focus is on the IRL component. RnDAO’s proposal focuses on a stra…

[thedevanshmehta]

I don’t like the restriction to 80 people only. On the one hand how do we select the 80, and second we lose out on the opportunity to bring new people into the ecosystem.

I preferred what we did in eth denver: have an open event for anytime interested in arbitrum, and separate conference rooms for high signal delegates to meet together

If the cap on attendees stays & it’s for us delegates only , I would likely vote against. Whole point of events is bringing in fresh blood

[KlausBrave]

Hi @thedevanshmehta thanks for the feedback.

On a yearly basis 1 event per quarter is what I’m envisaging, alternating 1 GovHack Core event, then 1 Open event, they are supportive and additive of each other maximising alignment and dual-track engagement with 1) core contributors and 2) attracting and growing top newcomer talent to ensure there is always fresh new dna of talent coming to the ecosystem.

I have had multiple feedback that we need to cater to both demographics. A Core event allows the DAO to do the deep strategic alignment work and priority proposal development to then setup the Open Events to be much more effective.

Regarding how we select for who can come to a Core event, I think @paulofonseca above raises very valid points and I’m open to develop a fair methodology for how this can be done.

If we didn’t do a Core event I did have some ideas about evolving the current format to make Day 1 more like a mini-offsite.

@KlausBrave

GovHack was conceived and created by Hack Humanity for the following purposes:

1. onboarding of new talent to solve issues for the DAO with proposals, success measures being increasing the quantity and quality of proposals.

2. onboarding and development of existing and new delegates to exercise their role live realtime guiding and providing feedback to teams writing proposals

3. a space for delegates and core contributors to network, build high trust relationships and make core complex DAO level decision making

We assess that GovHack is doing 1 and 2 well, point 3 in particular complex DAO level decision-making isn’t something intentionally designed for in the program and facilitation, people in the DAO are showing up and defacto using GovHack in this way in the absence of a dedicated opportunity to fulfil that need.

We have had 2 iterations of GovHack, I’d like to ideate with feedback here on what the 3rd iteration of GovHack needs to be most serving.

• The possibility to either
  • have a dual track of strategic facilitation for delegates and core contributors to work through hard problems and make decisions
  • use Day 1 as a mini offsite for delegates and core contributors with the support of structured facilitation to work through complex topics and make critical decisions, to sharpen up the most aligned tracks and challenge statements, then move to the hackathon with this enhanced clarity

How a yearly programme could work:

[thedevanshmehta]

Sorry why cant the core event happen during the public event? like it did for eth denver where we had some conference rooms booked out.

why do we need a dedicated core event instead of combining both into one?

[KlausBrave]

I love your line of thinking and final question here.

These are valid points @paulofonseca, I have a draft methodology for how this could work, do you want to collaborate with me to craft a methodology to select people to this type of event? and anyone else who wants to collaborate on this let me know.

[cp0x]

I have a question about the proposal:
I was not at GovHack, but I read your reports on these events and I think that such events are very useful for the development of Arbitrum.
Question - why are you not satisfied with the current funding of these events?
Why should there be exactly 3 of these events?

[KlausBrave]

For the abundance of clarity on scholarships, the principle we are currently operating with is the same as for the last GovHack, it’s a pool to enable people who could not normally afford to come to participate. Agree with your take @thedevanshmehta, a lot of the key people are already flying into the major ETH events and do not need to have their flights covered.

For GovHack Brussels, we had $10k for scholarships, ran a strict criteria-based application process, awarded 20 applicants, 15 showed up, and funds were distributed. The underused $2,500 was returned to the DAO in a fiscally responsible manner.

@KlausBrave

Note the plan was to distribute $10k (20 x $500) scholarships, we awarded 20 scholarships, yet 5 people didn’t show up or were in eligible, the final scholarship spend was $7,500.

• Scholarship winners announcement 1
• Scholarship winners announcement 2

[0xDonPepe]

I like the idea of having three GovHack Core events per year. It would be awesome to see them spread across different regions, like LatAm, Europe, and Asia, to ensure global participation and perspectives.

I also echo the questions raised by others about the criteria for selecting key stakeholders. It’s crucial to know how these will be chosen and how we’ll ensure a diverse representation within the group. The scholarships are a great touch, as they’ll help bring in voices that might otherwise be left out.

One thing I’d add is the importance of making sure that these events are accessible, not just to those already deeply involved in the ecosystem but also to emerging leaders who might bring fresh perspectives.

Finding the right balance between exclusivity for effectiveness and inclusivity for fresh ideas will be crucial for the success of these events.

[KlausBrave]

Hi @cp0x,

Thanks for your question, it’s a good one.

It’s taken a few iterations to workout appropriate pricing, and how to navigate the Foundation, the DAO, sponsorship to be funded.

The first GovHack in Denver cost $200k to produce, I personally made a loss of $10k going into debt to run the event of this quality. The funds supplied from the Foundation + Sponsorship didn’t cover what was required and I paid out of pocket to ensure a high quality event.

GovHack at ETH CC (Brussels)

The approximate budget for GovHack ETHDenver was $200k. It was co-organised and funded with the Foundation, Hack Humanity and sponsorship. The first GovHack event was almost all costs to prove the concept, no profitability. For GovHack ETHcc in Brussels the event size is 50% larger, we are increasing the prize pool from $15 to 20k, adding a dedicated afterparty, adding $10k of scholarships, proper financing for media, marketing, team, all components. The top-line figure of $309k has continge…

GovHack ETHcc with expanded scope we requested $309k including contingency, $272k was the actual final cost, full breakdown in the transparency report. Unspent funds have all been returned to the DAO.

Full cost breakdown for GovHack ETHcc here

@KlausBrave

Actual costs

Each time around it requires hundreds of hours pre, during, post GovHack by myself and a dedicated crew to produce a event of this nature, complexity and quality, often in new countries which we need to scout and adapt to. At Hack Humanity, we have the capabilities after years in the industry to execute, but I want to make it known that this is a non-trivial thing to do, particularly given the last events were produced in 3.5 and 4.5 weeks from when the green light and funding was accessible and produced in new cities we had not operated in before (Denver & Brussels).

With respect to am I satisfied with the current funding of these events, I believe we have now hit on a sustainable model, there is no “current funding”, this is a request for additional funds to continue funding future events.
Running large events have a lot of cost and low margins, yet the current structure used to deliver GovHack ETHcc is now in the right configuration where Hack Humanity can have our expertise covered and the DAO can have transparency of costs and trust we are fiscally responsible as evidenced by us returning unused funds from the original $309k budget.

Every new country where a GovHack needs to be run will have different supplier costs, the model we now have is to 1) ask for at least what is needed to ensure we are never caught short without enough funds to run the event, 2) have the DAOs trust and understanding we transparently report costs and return the unspent funds, this allows Hack Humanity to effectively operate and GovHack ETHcc proved the model works.

Why 3 events? either 3 or 4 Core/Open events in some combination we believe covers accessibility for people across multiple continents and is a good periodic IRL synchronisation cadence for remote digital workers to balance building trusted relationships in person.
Exact number and type of events is very much open for discussion.

[KlausBrave]

Hi @thedevanshmehta, this is a critical and time sensitive question.

I think it can, I like your suggestions on how to bring the Core elements into the existing GovHack format, and I have made my own suggestions above (and in GovHack ETHcc Impact Report - Future Recommendations section) for how I think the event time and space can be partitioned to achieve these effects. It requires careful consideration and programme design, I’d be for up speaking with you further on the design criteria for this if you are up for it?

In the interest of what’s realistically possible if the DAO wants a pre Devcon event this year, then this would be the path of least resistance.
We’d need to make this decision asap as it’s 9 weeks out, I am in Bangkok right now, have hired a local event producer who has researched and ranked 46 venues, of what fits our needs for size, quality, proximity to Devcon, a main open room + breakout rooms and availability, there is only around 4-5 venues left and I imagine those will start to book up fast.

Note I produced this Core/offsite event type variant in this proposal that can alternate with the current GovHack Open model because I was encouraged by multiple stakeholders to do so, but in the near term for an event for this year I am happy to rework this proposal to explore adaptation of the current GovHack to better fulfil the needs for strategic alignment and deep work among existing contributors in addition to onboarding newcomers.

I’d need a few more positive signals to this response to confidently shift in that direction.

[KlausBrave]

Hi @Bruce thanks for the feedback that the details are clear!

Absolutely for metrics that can be quantified we will, we do need to be careful of what targets and thresholds to set, it’s very easy to get this wrong i.e. number of decisions made. Actually less but more important number of decisions like the Vision, Mission, Strategy, Goals getting done is more important than targeting getting 15 decisions for it’s own sake.

Regarding having a small group of people in the audience it sparked an idea I have for a facilitation technique I’ve used called a fishbowl, key people debate a topic in the centre of the circle, those around the edges listen only, you leave an empty chair, to allow those in the audience to jump in and someone on the inner circle rotates out. This could be valuable for high stakes conversations and it is a mechanism for fair distribution of voice in a conversation:

Fish Bowl

I’ll give this some more consideration on how we quantify success, participant/audience types and facilitation methodology, thanks for the questions.

[KlausBrave]

Hi @jameskbh,

Thanks for your question. Some of my answers are now already spread out across other comments in this post.

To answer, there are 3 things that are particularly distinct.

1. in addition to the GovHack Core format being specifically structured and facilitated for existing contributors to undertake deep exploration, prioritisation and decision-making we are going to do deep co-working sessions on high-priority proposals, a proposal accelerator with those present to rapidly advance and do real work across the days to prep proposals for wider distribution on the Forum, Snapshot and Tally voting.

@KlausBrave

Proposal Development Tracks: Collaborative work on maturing the highest-priority proposals

2. We believe innovation can come from anywhere and we need to factor for outside innovation, see this graphic from the Hack Humanity’s standard pitch deck:

Thus we are reserving space for:

@KlausBrave

Invited experts and advisors

It’s worth noting there is precedent for this with Steve Job’s The 100 offsite format bringing a set of people together who have the context, skillset, not only all most senior/powerful (or in DAO terms high Voting Power) people in the room:

Steve Jobs’ Secret To Building Great Teams 

MEMO: Steve Jobs agenda for a secret meeting - www.alexanderjarvis.com

This inspires us to develop a DAO principled version of this kind of event with a novel selection rubic for who is in the room, for instance a person’s Karma Score can form part of the weighting:

Active delegates of arbitrum

We are very much open for this to be a community co-design process and to take suggestions for best practice others have seen in other events, offsites and in particular for DAOs.

3. HackHumanity has the track record of successfully delivering 2 IRL events for Arbitrum with great quantitative and qualitative results, see:

@KlausBrave

• GovHack Denver (NPS 67)
• GovHack ETHcc (NPS 83)
• the track record of Hack Humanity team to conduct complex multi-stakeholder engagement online and in-person, bespoke event programming and production under tight time constraints in multiple territories all over the world, and to design and deliver strategic facilitation with Arbitrum stakeholders.

[Bruce]

The more consideration on important Vision, Strategy does makes more sense and the success metrics could be adjusted accordingly when the events are on the run.
I love the idea of Fishbowl, the Governance does need a “a fair distribution of voice”.
Thanks you for the explanation and outstanding ideas.