@Michigan_Blockchain and @PrincetonBlockchain thank you for your kind words and support.
Again, thank you. We also believe in the work your and other university blockchain groups are doing to onboard the next generation of blockchain - and Arbitrum - leaders and contributors. It is important and vital work for our ecosystem.
@juanbug and I have posted our perspective below on behalf of the Uniswap DAO’s Arbitrum governance team (UADP).
We voted FOR this proposal. The UADP is excited to see the maturation of Plurality Labs from its acquisition by ThriveCoin. The Plurality team should now have more bandwidth to address some of the issues that they previously ran into, such as communications.
“We funded 250+ projects, and spurred movement all over the DAO. But we didn’t document our work and value well”
“Our bias was for action. We cared about creating value and learning - and put blinders on for everything else. We should have hired a Marketing or Comms person.”
“There seems to be wide agreement that we created value but need to scale, document, and showcase.”
One of the most important aspects of any grant program, working group, or sub-DAO is relaying information to the stakeholder who initially entrusted you with a particular task and set of capital. In this instance, we are appreciative of Plurality’s work and effort that has gone into providing resources for numerous projects.
Another aspect that we’re fans of is the funding of grant programs upon reaching particular milestones. This will allow for funds to be disseminated in a more calculated manner–it’s important to double down on the success stories and move on from defunct projects. As mentioned by a couple of other folks, we would like to see some general KPIs implemented for tracking the continual progression of a project–these can be a mix of both qualitative and quantitative metrics. They can also be done on an ad hoc basis since each grant may be unique.
I voted FOR this proposal.
Plurality Labs has been everywhere in the DAO, and have become a critical force, holding the DAO together.
I think the criticism of how they have handled some of their responsibilities around communicating and documenting their outputs is valid and am confident they can address these issues during the next few months.
Dear @DisruptionJoe & Plurality Labs team,
Thank you for the detailed proposal regarding Milestone 1b(ridge) of your pluralistic grants framework. It’s clear you’ve put a lot of thought into the plan and have taken steps to address feedback from the community.
I noticed that this proposal requests the same amount of ARB (3.36M) as your original proposal from August 2023. However, the price of ARB seems to have doubled from around $1 in August 2023 to roughly $2 now in March 2024.
I was hoping you could provide some insight into your decision to request the same amount of ARB despite this price change. In USD terms, 3.36M ARB would be worth twice as much now compared to August 2023.
Was this an intentional choice to increase the USD value of the funding to expand the scope of this phase? Or was it an oversight in not adjusting the amount to maintain a similar USD value as the original proposal?
I think it would be beneficial to the community’s evaluation of this proposal if you could clarify the reasoning behind the ARB amount requested and how you’re accounting for ARB price fluctuations. This will help provide a clearer picture of the proposed funding.
Thanks in advance for addressing this question. Your work on the pluralistic grants framework is much appreciated and I look forward to seeing how Milestone 1b progresses.
Mcfly.
We definitely put a lot of work into the reworking of our proposal into this simple format which responds to the requests from the delegates and communities.
Everything was denominated in ARB in milestone 1.
Because everything was denominated in ARB, it was not an oversight. However, if you would prefer to denominate in $$$, @thrivegiraffe has a clear explanation of the issue to avoid.
Lastly, you will see that the unspent part of Milestone 1 was rolled over into the Tally request. This is why Tally is sending 2,846,000 ARB to the PL-ARB Grant Safety Multisig. The allocation fund portion - all but our service charge (even this is sent over the course of the deployment) - is controlled by a 4/6 multisig with delegates and only 2 Plurality Labs team members.
I really appreciate your acknowledgement!
First things first, we, as ITU Blockchain, should say that the whole process will be worth remembering when it is done thanks to who contributed to the project.
As Milestone 1 reviews are being considered, we cannot deny the fact that we are not really ready for the fast-paced implementation of Milestone 2. So, we agree that thinking of a new way of transition is a wise decision. Also, when we look at how far we have come with the Milestone 1 process and realize its outcomes, we see that we should keep supporting the project. Furthermore, with its adjusted costs and the trustworthy advisory board, we believe that Milestone 1B will be a great opportunity to create a smooth bridge between Milestone 1 and 2 in terms of scaling.
On the other hand, while it is a long-term project which aims to create a better system and understanding of allocating grants, we should underline that collected datas and reports will play a crucial role. So, we are waiting to be informed about the process with more detailed information with their areas in being used. In addition, just like the idea of Milestone 1B, we have the faith that the shifts between Milestones should not be in a rush but in the most optimal way with the aim of creating a sustainable autonomous grants allocation programme.
With these rationales being considered, we, as ITU Blockchain Delegation team, will vote in favour of this proposal with a strong belief in the project.
As part of the Plurality Labs Firestarters initiative, r3gen Finance has been working to deliver financial reporting for the Arbitrum DAO (to be shared shortly). In addition, r3gen has prepared a detailed report on the Plurality Labs grant program, performing a deep-dive into how the funds have been deployed within the program. The results of this are displayed below.
Focus was placed on funds that have been spent, funds committed to grantees but not spent and funds that were not allocated.
The 12 programs to receive funding were assessed, showing how Plurality Labs planned to spend the granted funds across their various initiatives.The largest 10 grantees were also then identified, with an reporting on committed vs. spent funds for those grantees performed.
The 12 programs fell under 4 main Plurality Labs categories - these were summarised and context was given around what each category’s programs aimed to achieve.
To view the full report, please see PDF attached:
I voted FOR this proposal.
I have been following the work of Plurality Labs for a few months, as well as the evolution of this proposal by listening to the active feedback from the community and other delegates. In addition, to clarify many of its processes in the closure of Milestone 1.
I am excited to see the execution of this milestone and the evolution of the pluralistic framework in the DAO.
On behalf of the Arbitrum delegates who entrusted their voting power to me and the answers provided by @DisruptionJoe, I’m voting FOR the proposed funding of Plurality Labs Milestone 1B(ridge) program on Tally.
Thank you, @DisruptionJoe, for your prompt and detailed reply to my concerns regarding the ARB amount requested in the Milestone 1B(ridge) proposal. Your explanation, along with the insight provided by @thrivegiraffe, has clarified the rationale behind keeping the requested amount in ARB terms rather than adjusting for the current USD value.
I acknowledge the uncertainty surrounding ARB price volatility, especially considering the upcoming token unlocks. Given this context, I agree that denominating the proposal in ARB terms is a fair approach, as it simplifies the process for everyone involved.
Moreover, I appreciate the transparency in rolling over the unspent portion of Milestone 1 into the Tally request for Milestone 1B(ridge). The fact that the allocation fund is controlled by a 4/6 multisig with delegates and only 2 Plurality Labs team members adds an additional layer of trust and security to the process.
Once again, thank you for addressing my questions and providing a clear explanation of the decision-making process behind the proposal. I believe that the Plurality Labs team has demonstrated their commitment to the Arbitrum ecosystem and their willingness to adapt to community feedback. As such, I am confident in casting my vote in favor of the Milestone 1B(ridge) funding proposal.
I look forward to seeing the continued progress and positive impact of the pluralistic grants framework on the Arbitrum ecosystem.
This is a response on behalf of the TreasureDAO’s ARC.
We will be voting FOR the proposed funding of PL’s Milestone 1B on Tally.
We believe the program has so far been a success and should continue to move forward and grow. It is probably the most comprehensive grants framework that we have as a DAO, providing a wide variety of options for applicants.
Programs like this are critical to the growth of the Arbitrum Ecosystem.
Lastly, the PL team’s openness to all the feedback given on 1A and their desire to have, in @DisruptionJoe’s words “99% approval” from the DAO underlines their commitment to putting out and refining a framework that literally everyone is happy with. This is no small feat. 
We voted in favor of the proposal. We believe Plurality Labs has done a good job in previous milestone 1a, and we want to continue supporting Plurality Labs in their work in decentralized grant decision making. Many members of the advisory board have strong track record of delivering valuable insights to support the Arbitrum ecosystem.
I had not seen this before, this is dope, I want these financial reports for everything we do.
Will be voting in favor of this proposal. Let’s have it
We’re maintaining our support for the vote on Tally, for the same reasons stated previously.
(Btw the report sent by @Pepperoni_Jo3 / r3gen Finance is quite helpful, thanks for the visualizations!)
The below response 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.
As we’ve already stated, we’ll be abstaining from voting as we’re part of the Advisory Board outlined in the proposal. We remain supportive of the proposal and looking forward to seeing its execution.
I voted in favor of this proposal, confident in the direction and impact Plurality Labs aims to achieves. I mainly recommend to have a better communication strategy in the future. Also adding the board is a great step, I hope it can impact the transparency and efficiency of this program.
Excited to see this vision unfold and contribute to Arbitrum ecosystem. Thanks!
