Thanks so much, @Larva and @EzR3aL , for the thoughtful feedback. Let me share where we’re at with this. Arbitrum is truly vast – we’re talking about everything from developer guides and tech infrastructure to governance, incentives, multiple-programs (AVI, ARDC, GCP etc…), grants and this will keep growing as ecosystem evolve. A significant part of this ecosystem evolves organically, and while it operates beyond the Arbitrum Foundation’s direct oversight, we believe it’s essential to create clear visual maps, clear navigations, infographics and proper content flows that illustrate how all this grows and how. With this refined approach, we aim to make the ecosystem more accessible and understandable for everyone, helping us identify opportunities for meaningful engagement and support
One thing I really want to clear up – ArbitrumHub isn’t something we dreamed up in isolation, and we’re definitely not trying to replace arbitrum.foundation. We’re actually building everything in close collaboration with everyone including AF, Program managers and other-stakeholder. In fact, a few months back, ArbitrumHub played a key role in managing grant program details through its grant hub feature, which was officially linked in the Arbitrum Foundation’s grant forms. Everything we do is a close collaboration with important people in the space, including the AF, Avi, and other program managers.
To maintain and grow this initiative effectively, we need proper resources and support from the DAO. While we’re passionate about this work, sustaining it long-term requires appropriate funding – we can’t continue to operate on a volunteer basis indefinitely.
@Larva , I wanted to apologize for the slower response on my end. I’ve been heads-down working on a detailed research document that really dives into ArbitrumHub, which I think will answer your questions thoroughly. I’ve included that documentation below.
Here is the highly researched doc that should be able to answer and clear out some doubts around arbitrumhub:arbitrumhub.pdf - Google Drive
Thanks for the clarification. So I can understand that ArbitrumHub is a kind of vertical expansion for Arbitrum.Foundation in some respects, and the aim is to better facilitate cooperation within DAOs, right?
ArbitrumHub aims to enhance accessibility, understanding, and navigation across all aspects of the DAO’s ongoing and past initiatives. Think of it as a centralized hub where anyone—whether deeply involved or casually interested—can easily access clear, actionable insights into everything happening within the DAO & arbitrum ecosystem.
For instance, consider GCP, a major initiative recently approved by the DAO. Currently, understanding what GCP is, its progress, its goals, the team behind it, and where it stands on its path to success requires significant effort and active involvement. This challenge is not unique to GCP; it applies broadly across workgroups, calls, initiatives, and projects. Much of this activity grows organically within the DAO, but the lack of a unified platform means many efforts remain fragmented or underappreciated.
Additionally, many valuable resources, courses, and educational initiatives developed by community members through grant programs often fade into obscurity. Without proper visibility, their impact is diminished. ArbitrumHub can play a pivotal role in addressing this gap by keeping these contributions highlighted, organized, and easily accessible, ensuring their long-term relevance and utility.
Finally, we assure the DAO of our commitment to delivering on our promises. We have the skills, expertise, and understanding to execute this vision effectively. However, should the DAO determine that we are not meeting our commitments, and a majority of delegates reach consensus, the initiative can be halted, and any unused funds will be proportionally returned to the DAO.
okay. just found a lot of duplication between arbitrumhub and arbitrum foundation’s official website, so I didn’t think that’s necessary. I’m looking forward to the more updates from arbitrumhub.
We are creating a one-stop hub for everything Arbitrum, and foundation initiatives are no exception. Alongside DAOs, we are incorporating them under this umbrella.
We truly appreciate you taking the time to review the proposal and will definitely incorporate your feedback and suggestions.
This budget feels excessive, especially the labor costs. Could you consider outsourcing some work, like copywriting and design? And does the project manager really need to be paid $80/hour? It seems that cost could be halved.
You’ve set up a lot of KPIs and SOPs, but the reporting frequency seems excessive. Monthly, bi-monthly, and weekly reports could be streamlined. For example, one report every two months should suffice—there’s no need to generate so many documents.
The proposal mentions open-source GitHub and Figma files, which is great in theory. But honestly, has the community actually used these resources before? Is there concrete data to justify the need for this feature?
New features like pop-ups and event pages—do users really need these? Could you first conduct user research to see if there’s actual demand before implementing them?
Suggestions:
Instead of asking for $400,000+ upfront, start with a basic version and request half the budget. Once you meet initial goals, apply for additional funds.
Offer small rewards, like NFTs or tokens, to community members who contribute on GitHub or provide suggestions. This would make participation more appealing.
Combine monthly, bi-monthly, and quarterly reports to reduce unnecessary management costs. Focus your resources on actual development and outreach.
we will consider your feedback around budget and will optimise.
thanks, we will consider it
There is no short term but long term benefits as the initiative remains future proof so even if we decide to leave, this can keep going.
There are lot of things going on in the dao and ecosystem, such features could enhance the visibility around these items and people who are interested can get involve or participate.
Thank you! We will consider it. Although the budget is proposed for a year, it will be released quarterly by MSS. We will provide more specifics and include this in the final iteration before submitting it to Snapshot.
Sounds good, we will consider it.
Sounds good, we will consider it.
Thank you so much for taking the time to review and provide some really solid suggestions.
Hi @0x_Buidler, thank you for the proposal. The concept of Arbitrum Hub is enticing, and we agree with your assessment that more needs to be done to consolidate information and resources to allow for easier access to information, programs, etc…
However, at this point, we feel that there is too much fragmentation in the overall Arbitrum communication touch points, and while the idea of an Arbitrum Hub is interesting, we feel it will further exacerbate this issue.
The budget for the proposed site is excessive, and it doesn’t require a developer and researcher to be assigned to it monthly. A Copywriter and Designer (definitely doesn’t require a UI/UX Designer) are needed for the weekly newsletter, with more weight on the Copywriter than the Designer. This has a similar weightage to your planned social media posts (which have not been defined).
There are also too many hours allocated for the Project Manager because, at the most, the monthly tasks will be a weekly newsletter, 5x weekly social posts, and some updates to the site that need to be managed.
The chatbot is also unnecessary if the information sections are clearly defined.
In summary, we are not agreeable to this proposal based on our reasons and explanation above.
Thank you, @CastleCapital, for the feedback! We will refine the proposal before moving to Snapshot.
Feedback from other delegates will also be considered in the final iteration. I agree that we should adjust the weight of some key roles and reduce the weight of part-time roles. We’ll ensure these changes are incorporated before proceeding to Snapshot.
@here We will proceed with the snapshot in January after the DAO holidays. Until then, we plan to update the proposal based on the feedback received, which includes:
First running this as a pilot program with clearly defined impact metrics, use cases, and future goals throughout the DAO’s existence. We will refine the budget and roles according to the workload requirements.
Regarding reporting, we will reduce the frequency and instead focus on platform use cases, expansion, and outreach. We will publish comprehensive work and performance reports bimonthly.
The budget will also be reduced since our initial goal is to run this as pilot and establish proper workflows and integrate into different DAO verticals to increase impact. As this will be a pilot program, our first year will focus on developing this into a highly useful and impactful initiative. While the budget will be requested for a full year, it will be distributed quarterly via MSS.
If others have any additional suggestions or feedback, please feel free to share.
Thank you for a very detailed description of the work.
On the one hand, $417,000 is not too much compared to other proposals, but for a site with information, it is a bit overpriced.
Given the volume of work that you plan to do, I have questions and I would like to reduce the Arbitration costs:
What does a researcher do?
I see that he apparently collects requests for improvement, but I have no idea what he will do for 100 hours a month. I believe that his workload should be several times less.
It is also unclear what a UI/UX designer should do full-time.
The main job of the site is to fill it with relevant information. New parts of the site with a designer are needed, but not on a permanent basis. New initiatives or grants, working groups appear once every few months. Accordingly, such a large volume is not required (by the way, I would advise the designer to make a dark theme on the site). I believe that his work can be significantly reduced.
In addition, I would like to understand how many users the site has. This is important in terms of costs per person. If only top delegates use this, then for 50 people this is too much of an expense.
Tracks DAO activities, governance proposals, and community initiatives
Gathers and organizes raw information from multiple sources
Acts as the primary information gatherer for the entire team
Responsible for writing research articles on the different program outcomes, learnings and wrong doings based on the public available information.
Copywriter
Receives raw data from the researcher
Transforms raw information into engaging content
Handles all written content across the platform
Ensures consistent messaging and tone
UI/UX Designer
Wears multiple creative hats:
Creates website interface designs
Produces all graphic designs for articles
Develops social media visuals
Designs infographics
Plans information architecture
Monitors user experience
Suggests UX improvements
Developer
Implements all designs on ArbitrumHub
Handles technical implementation of UX improvements
Manages website functionality and updates
Brings the designer’s vision to life
Project Manager
Coordinates between all roles and with dao
Ensures smooth handoffs between stages
Conducts regular check-ins
Verifies work quality at each stage
Maintains project timelines
Resolves any communication gaps or misunderstandings
Linear Workflow: Researcher → Copywriter → Designer → Developer (with PM overseeing each stage)
Each role requires specialized expertise and carries full responsibility for its respective area. Project Management is crucial for maintaining smooth coordination, as each stage in the workflow builds upon the previous one.
You have shown everything very clearly and I see exactly the tasks of the employees.
But I was talking specifically about the volume of work.
I perfectly understand the desire to hire employees for a full working day, but I cannot yet imagine what the researcher will do so much time and the rest accordingly, since it is he who provides new information.
As a delegate, I look through all the information on the forum, monitor the voting - in fact, all the delegates do the work of the researcher, and also additionally watch the voting, write comments and participate in working groups. And this does not take up all the working time. Other participants have an even smaller volume of work.
I really like the site, everything is conveniently organized (even though I rarely use it),
but almost half a million dollars is a significant amount for the support and development of the site.
Large expenses may lead to a lack of funding from the community, I will additionally consult with specialists on this issue.
We agree with the motivations behind this proposal, but we have some observations that prevent us from supporting it in its current form.
First, we want to highlight that we share the opinion of other delegates regarding the budget breakdown, which seems somewhat excessive, as well as the workload assigned to certain roles.
Additionally, we believe that the proposed page could serve as a good update to the Arbitrum Foundation’s current website. While there are noticeable differences, we also see similarities, leading us to think that duplication of content could be avoided and costs potentially reduced.
Has integrating all these ideas into the foundation’s existing website been considered?
yes, we will follow up with some updates around this area before going to snapshot.
Yes, we have considered this and reached out to the AF team, identifying some synergies. In the past, ArbitrumHub has successfully facilitated briefings for various grant programs officially and was linked in all the official forms of the grant program. With continuous development, support, and proper resources in place, we plan to avoid duplication and instead align our efforts to maximize impact.
I want to post to signal that I have similar concerns that others have expressed regarding budget. I believe in funding people for work, but I think we also need to be prudent. The $ cost of this for 1 year is very expensive, and breaking down the costs there seem to be budgeting for repeating hourly costs for things that don’t seem to need to be worked on so frequently (UI/UX come to mind, as well as paying someone to manage a small team like this - is it really reasonable to expect a these roles to be working 100 hours a month for 12 months straight?).
The cost seems like an amount that you would expect this to be each persons full time, solo-income job and I don’t think the scope justifies that type of time commitment across a team of this size.
The duplicate work issue factors in here as well. In a vacuum, if we have multiple sites to reference it’s not a big deal… but the budget then becomes even more important to focus on. As now we’re getting into how much we are valuing having multiple sites for similar info. If there wasn’t a source already available the larger cost may be more justified, but as it stands this is a big cost for this type of project.
Its unfortunately retroactive grants aren’t more popular, because this seems like a good usecase for one to be honest.