Background
Name: 404 DAO
Position I am applying for: Council
TG: @cole_schendl @RikaGoldberg @JackSanYoda @pruitt_martin
Twitter: @404DAO
Affiliations: 404 DAO is a delegate for Optimism and Uniswap in addition to Arbitrum
Why You
Why would You be the best candidate for this position?
404 DAO is a dedicated and long-standing member of the Arbitrum community, having actively participated as a delegate since the DAO’s inception. Our governance team, primarily consisting of Georgia Tech graduates and current students, has diverse expertise across data analytics, blockchain development, blockchain security, business development, and MEV. With degrees in Computer Science, Data Science, Business, Finance, and Cybersecurity, our team is well-equipped to handle various interdisciplinary challenges. To learn more about our team please visit our notion page.
Active Involvement in STIP Round 1: Our team was an active participant in STIP Round 1, diligently reviewing and voting on over 95% of the total applications. While we recognize the good intentions behind STIP, we believe that its true effectiveness will be revealed only after a thorough, data-driven analysis. These types of data reports are critical for informing the DAO’s future strategies and ensuring meaningful progress for program design. It was this belief that motivated our team to produce a data driven recap of the voting results for STIP Round 1. This recap helped our team understand the challenges delegates faced in reviewing applications for round 1 and it sparked numerous internal discussions about enhancing the program. We expressed these thoughts in the working group and support the steps the authors have taken to iterate on STIP Round 1. As we look towards the execution of LTI PP, our primary focus will be to adopt a similar analytical approach for reviewing applicants to ensure the DAO gains detailed insights, which will be crucial for refining and evolving the design for the full long-term incentive program.
Working Groups & Governance History: From the inception of the Arbitrum DAO, we have been involved in its working groups and have emerged as influential voices in shaping its most significant proposals. For instance, we were among the first major delegates to publicly speak out against AIP-1 at the outset of the Arbitrum DAO and actively advocated for the adoption of the Plurality Labs Grants Program when its passing was uncertain. Our involvement extends to being one of the nine signatories on the STIP multisig, and being key contributors to multiple working groups across the DAO. We are active participants in the Hackathon Working Group and are leading the Onboarding Working Group. Our team consistently participates in L2Beat’s weekly Governance calls, where we discuss and provide insights on active proposals. Additionally, we have stayed updated with the progression of the LTI Pilot Program by participating in relevant calls and discussions with the Arbitrum Incentive Program Working Group.
Experience with Similar Responsibilities: Apart from governance work, our team has successfully organized two major web3 conferences and an accelerator program, which featured 7 early stage startups. There is significant overlap between the responsibilities of the Council and what is required to manage an accelerator program. Our team designed an internal scoring rubric, assessing applicants based on factors like team merit, innovation, and likelihood of success. We also provided feedback and coaching to each of our teams and helped them achieve considerable progress along their startup journey. These experiences have helped prepare us to be an effective council member for LTIPP.
Non-Bias: As a non-profit organization primarily focused on Ethereum protocol governance and education, we maintain neutrality toward existing and future Arbitrum based projects & protocols. Should we be elected to the council, our unbiased position as a delegate and ecosystem participant will form the basis for transparent and objective council decision-making, facilitating unbiased reviews of each application.
What do you think a good incentive application looks like?
A good incentive application aligns with a rubric that emphasizes program goals and milestones. We believe that an effective rubric for a pilot program should be designed to allow for operational flexibility with incentive mechanisms. This approach will allow teams to experiment with different incentive designs while maintaining a clear focus on the pilot program’s goal of gathering data for the Long-Term Incentives Program later this year.
Below, we have outlined the key criteria that we believe to be the most important in an application and provided a sample rubric & scoring method.
Clarity: Grant size, budget breakdown, and how the funds will be used to drive long-term benefit to Arbitrum, should all be extremely clear and presented in straightforward language.
Measurable KPIs: Data-driven methodology with pre-determined success metrics. Measurable and Quantitative to allow for effective analysis of distribution data.
Sybil Resistant Mechanisms: Mechanisms to combat sybil attacks are critical for successful implementation of incentive programs. Applications that fail to address strategy around sybil vulnerabilities will be penalized.
Quality of User Acquisition: Incentives should aim to attract sticky users that add long-term value to the Arbitrum ecosystem and community. Applications that incentivize short-term farming will be penalized.
Team Viability: Teams with a high propensity to execute and deliver will be prioritized. Bringing the best talent and teams to Arbitrum has, and will continue to be a primary goal for the DAO.
Product Innovation: Enabling products that present new ideas and innovative product designs should be a priority for the DAO across all Grant Programs and specifically this Pilot program.
Arbitrum Aligned: Clarity on whether the protocol is native to Arbitrum and the date of deployment on Arbitrum mentioned. Past performance details, key metrics, achievements, and relevant dashboards provided. Clear description of the protocol roadmap. Historic audit information and results.
Novel Incentive Design Mechanics: We believe trying and testing new ideas is critical in a Pilot program so we can evaluate what incentive mechanisms work best. We also understand this will look different for each industry niche (gaming, defi, etc). This is why we have added a novel incentive design bonus point to our sample rubric design, which you can find below.
| Category | Incomplete Application (-1 pt) | Necessary (0 pt) | Sufficient (1 pt) | Exceptional (2 pt) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Completeness of Required Information | Does not include required information | Includes all required information | N/a | N/a |
| Clarity of Objectives and Execution | N/a | Application lacks detail and/or breakdown of use of funds is missing OR Application lacks clarity on how the grant will foster innovation and growth within the Arbitrum ecosystem OR Execution of grant is not well-defined | Grant Information is clear and presents a thorough breakdown of planned use of funds AND Application thoroughly shows how the grant will foster growth within the Arbitrum ecosystem with a sound execution strategy | Grant Information is clear and presents a thorough breakdown of planned use of funds AND Application clearly shows how the grant will foster innovation and growth within the Arbitrum ecosystem AND Execution strategy, grant justification, and timeline is thorough detailed. AND Proper risk management is detailed |
| Team Execution & Track Record | Team has shown an inability to execute effectively | Team has a limited track record and their ability to execute is unclear | Team has proven a track record in ability to execute | N/a |
| Product Innovation Score | Product is an obvious copy pasta fork | Product lacks new innovation design | Product brings new ideas and/or innovative designs to Arbitrum | N/a |
| Measurable KPIs & Distribution | No trackable KPIs for distribution or effectiveness of incentives | KPIs are given but they are not thoroughly thought out or lack effectiveness | Applicant has a quantitative approach to distribution with pre-defined success metrics | Applicant has a quantitative approach to distribution with pre-defined success metrics AND Sensible smart contract architecture to distribute rewards |
| Sybil Resistant Mechanisms | Includes no mechanisms to protect against Sybil attack vectors | Mitigation tactics to combat Sybil attacks are unclear or incomplete | Application presents thorough mechanisms and/or strategy to mitigate against sybil attack vectors Application presents thorough mechanisms and/or strategy to mitigate against sybil attack vectors | N/a |
| Quality of User Attraction | Incentive Design leaves gaps for short-term exploitation | Incentive design accounts for short-term exploitation but fails to focus on long-term value creation | Incentive design focuses on long-term value creation | N/a |
| Arbitrum Alignment | Fails to address deployment, protocol performance, roadmap and audit information | Addresses deployment information but lacks sufficient information around protocol performance, metrics and audit information | Thoroughly presents Arbitrum deployment information along with protocol performance, roadmap, and audit information | Protocol has historically displayed Arbitrum alignment through its deployments and support for the ecosystem AND Thoroughly presents all protocol performance, roadmap, audit information |
| Commitment to Data Reporting | Fails to acknowledge commitment to data reporting requirements and consequences of non-compliance | Acknowledges commitment to data reporting requirements and consequences of non-compliance | N/a | N/a |
| Novel Incentive Design (Bonus) | N/a | No novel incentive designs presented | Application presents a new and unique incentive design | N/a |
What are your goals for this program?
As delegates for Optimism and Uniswap, we’ve had the opportunity to learn from successful grant programs, gaining insights into the review processes of their councils/committees. By incorporating best practices while allowing room for innovation and keeping an Arbitrum-specific approach, we aim to elevate this pilot program beyond STIP Round 1, laying the foundation for the full LTIP. Some specific factors that will lead us there:
Communication and Congruence
First and foremost, ample and open communication lines between applicants, application advisors, and the council are critical for a successful Grants program. Clear communication to applicants about the program’s goals will lead to stronger applications, better design mechanics, and a higher likelihood of success for the DAO. Achieving congruence across all parties involved, from the Council to Application Advisors and Applicants, is crucial.
Inclusion, Neutrality, and Openness
We firmly believe that the distribution of incentives should not show preferential treatment towards any particular user group. Instead, our focus is on identifying and supporting teams that demonstrate the highest potential for successful execution and delivering substantial ROI for the DAO. This approach is deeply rooted in the guiding principles of Arbitrum’s governance as stated in the Arbitrum DAO constitution, which emphasize the importance of nurturing open innovation, enabling seamless interoperation, and ensuring user choice. By striving to create an equitable landscape for all network participants, our aim is not to pick winners and losers but to cultivate a fertile ground for diverse ideas and projects to flourish. This commitment to impartiality and equal opportunity is the cornerstone of our philosophy, ensuring that every decision made under the Long Term Incentives Pilot Program contributes to a balanced and thriving Arbitrum ecosystem.
Iterative Design + Feedback = Commitment to Improve
Our commitment to the Long Term Incentives Pilot Program is fundamentally rooted in the principle of fostering iterative design and feedback loops. We recognize that initial grant designs may not be perfect, acknowledging that there is always room for enhancement and refinement. This mindset is vital as we learn from ongoing initiatives like the LTI Pilot Program and STIP R1. We firmly believe that through a continuous cycle of experimentation, feedback, and redesign, we will develop an Arbitrum Incentive Program that achieves longevity and sustainability.
To achieve this, we actively encourage a culture of open communication and constructive criticism. We invite delegates, protocols, and users to engage with us transparently, sharing their honest feedback about all aspects of the Pilot Program. This input is invaluable, as it provides us with the insights needed to evolve and strengthen the Grants Program. This collaborative approach is key to building a Grants Program that not only meets the current demands of the ecosystem but is also robust and flexible enough to evolve with its future challenges and opportunities.