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 AGAINST the proposal.
While we appreciate the work @danielo has put into the DAO so far, we cannot support this proposal in its current form. We’ve discussed this proposal with @danielo in Brussels and expressed our concerns then, which we still feel are relevant.
The main reason why we cannot support the proposal is that we don’t know what kind of things we’ll be funding, what kinds of proposals need to be written and who is going to be writing them. With the proposed open-ended approach we see a risk that this initiative will become a solution looking for a problem to solve, funding initiatives that won’t be able to find support in the DAO. If we had a clearer understanding of the specific initiatives that would be funded through this proposal, we’d be more inclined to support it.
Furthermore, Firestarters by Plurality Labs had a similar format in the past, and there was discussion and debate regarding which funded initiatives were deemed successful and which fell short of expectations. That makes us cautious about diving into a similar funding structure without more detailed information about the specific goals.
Overall, we appreciate Daniel’s effort in developing the proposal and recognize where he’s coming from with its creation. We believe the initiative can be valuable in the future if such a need arises, and we remain open to reconsidering it at that time.