We are strongly in favor of this proposal. As many delegates predicted, the GCP was a failure. What truly matters for any organization, including DAOs, is the ability to learn from mistakes and pivot. Acknowledging the error and deciding to stop the initiative is probably the hardest part, as it’s easy to fall into the sunk-cost fallacy—the tendency to continue a strategy or course of action simply because significant resources have already been invested, even when it’s clear that moving on would be the better choice.
As a DAO, learning how to pivot from failed initiatives gives us a competitive edge, which will ultimately benefit ARB holders in the long run through stronger price action.
Regarding the winding down of GCP activities, we believe the proposal has been well detailed, but we’d like to offer the following suggestions:
- Add a section in the proposal description requiring the GCP Council to draft a wind-down plan. This should outline costs and any pending items that can’t be immediately processed, helping the DAO stay informed and maintain accountability.
- Include a clear plan for migrating multisig funds to a safer location. In our view, these funds should be transferred to the DAO treasury. Adding this detail to the proposal allows governance to formally approve it and saves time later.
- You propose a six-month severance package. Please clarify that this will only be paid after the GCP has completed all outstanding tasks related to the wind-down, including delivering a final report detailing the fund status and any remaining obligations.
We want to thank @GFXlabs and @NathanVDH for raising concerns early on and continuing to monitor the project throughout its development.