We have further reviewed the feedback of other delegates since our earlier response and have an update to our earlier position to ABSTAIN on the proposal.
While we are still in favour of the proposed program in principle, we have concerns in the following areas:
-
The proposal positions RnDAO as co-funding this proposal alongside ArbitrumDAO but responses on this front have been unclear at best. The initial proposal seemed to suggest that RnDAO and Arbitrum DAO would both be putting capital into the program, which has since been dismissed and corrected in the comments that RnDAO’s portion is ‘sweat equity’ or ‘human capital’.
-
Due to this misunderstanding on our part, we would like a breakdown of the planned utilization of funds allocated from Arbitrum’s budget and the recipients, along with the allotted hours and rates of RnDAO’s allocated ‘human capital’.
-
With regards to the equity provided by the projects participating in this program, what is the proposed split between Arbitrum DAO and RnDAO? This information is essential for delegates to ensure that Arbitrum DAO is getting a fair deal.
-
In your experience, what is the average success rate of Accelerator-funded projects within crypto?
The issue with the proposal is not on the actual program itself but on how important details of the working relationship between Arbitrum DAO and RnDAO in this program have not been outlined as clearly as possible for delegates’ consideration and required questions raised to bring them to light.
We still think the program outlined holds potential value and as such we will vote ABSTAIN on Tally and expect the above to be clarified in detail for proper review by delegates before any distribution of funds to RnDAO.