I am voting in favor of the option “Arbitrum + 2 others.” As I mentioned previously, I believe this research has the potential to provide valuable insights, helping to guide future proposals and initiatives in the right direction. Regarding the option itself, I think a comparative approach is the best way to assess how we can improve relative to our competitors.
However, I’d like to point out a few considerations:
- Although it’s already planned, I want to emphasize the importance of clearly sharing the selection criteria for builders and the specific research questions once the initiative is underway. This will ensure transparency and foster ongoing feedback from the community.
- I agree with some delegates who have raised concerns that this research might risk not generating tangible value. However, I believe this issue is less about the research itself and more about how the outcomes and insights are communicated. Effective communication will be crucial once the research concludes (I align with @Juanrah on this point).
- I was surprised to see this proposal already on Snapshot, and I agree with some delegates who feel it could have stayed on the forum a bit longer. While I had the time to read and provide feedback, it seems that many others did not. Perhaps the proposal didn’t get enough visibility before moving to Snapshot, especially since it wasn’t presented during the BiWeekly Proposals Discussion Call. I understand the need to move quickly before the year-end break, but I believe that quality should always be a priority.