Nothing wrong with it as a general idea, I appreciate the intent, but I would like first to elaborate on what @AlexLumley posted:
While I think this could be valuable data, I don’t think it would be valuable now, at least not until orbit chains take a big market share. As a consequences, it feels like the current tools and info instruments we have now to evaluate tvl, data, txs, are more than enough for something that will be (hopefully) extremely important in future, but not prominent in the short term.
Adding to that, the fact that @davidgarcia just posted that the Foundation is finalizing agreements to index and distribute data to me is just a confirmation that is too soon for this initiative. We could be easily see more dashboard and services like this born after data is available, with different costs, different use cases and different outcomes
The following 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.
We’ll be voting FOR this proposal during the temperature check, but we would like to see more discussion around it and some clarification on the contentious issues raised in this thread before it goes to an onchain vote.
As Arbitrum’s current growth strategy seems to be centered around growing with Orbit chains, we believe it’s absolutely crucial to have data that allows us to make well-informed decisions.
GrowThePie already proved to be competent and reliable as a provider for metrics and dashboards showcasing chain activity, they’ve been also providing the delegates (including us) with custom data queries regarding Orbit usage, revenue and costs. It would be much more effective however if that data could be accessed, fact-checked and verified anytime on their dashboard.
Having said that, we share some of the concerns raised in this thread regarding scope, scaling and the choice of chains to cover, and therefore advise GtP to hold dedicated workshops for delegates before going to an onchain vote to address any confusion and concerns and to ensure that the dashboards bring value to the Orbit-centeric growth strategy.
Camelot is voting AGAINST the proposal “Transparency and Standardized Metrics for Orbit Chains.”
Camelot is the protocol most aligned with Arbitrum’s vision for Orbit: we have integrated six chains so far, with more to come. For this reason, we are well aware of the current numbers in terms of TVL, volume, and other relevant KPIs. As of now, the tracking done by L2Beat is not only well implemented but also more than sufficient for the DAO’s needs. Currently, we see that only three Orbit chains have a TVL above $1M, which is the threshold proposed for integration into the dashboard. Additionally, the volume is not significant yet.
At this time, it doesn’t make much sense for the DAO to finance and maintain a dashboard like this when L2Beat is already publishing what we consider to be the relevant data as a public good: we definitely think is important to have transparent and detailed data around Orbit, but the current proposal doesn’t seem to add any new value to already existing solutions. However, we are open to revisiting this reasoning when the Orbit market becomes substantial enough.
@Camelot see the post above yours from @krst, it seems your assertion L2Beat is already providing what is needed and this would be redundant is incorrect, why would L2Beat argue in favour of this proposal being needed, if L2Beat is currently getting custom data queries from GrowThePie.
Absolutely think there is scope for growthepie.xyz proposal, and considered there presentation and efforts showcasing at the recent govhack a clear sign of their efforts to align and work with Arbitrum.
I think the proposal struggles in terms of how we address scalability because the potential per chain cost would not be sustainable if we get to the points of 100s, 1000s or more chains over time. The foundation is clearly working on activities in this space, likely having had the opportunity to understand the issue somewhat more deeply … would like to see those thoughts added to the discussion as well before we keep going.
Hope discussion continues, that if an open process commences for such a dashboard that growthpie.xyz will be considered as a possible implementation partner.
We voted against this proposal, as there are some concerns with the value of this service. The first point is that while confirmed by Blockworks that this sums up to below market value, the total cost coming out to 210k is still a big ask. The ROI and value proposition of this proposal is not apparent to us, and until that proposition is visible, this proposal does not seem like a good use of money. If another vote were to take place with more explanation/vision of how Orbit chains and their analytics can be useful in specific cases, we could get behind that.
thanks for the discussion in this forum post. Although it is unfortunate that the proposal has not gained a majority vote for it on Snapshot, we appreciate anyone who shared feedback backing up their decision to vote for or against it.
This was also a great learning opportunity how this DAO functions and we had already decided to also engage more in Governance, which we find important to further decentralise decision-making and bring in our expertise on various scaling solutions.
We look forward for potential future collaborations in the Arbitrum ecosystem and what we can do to further highlight the needs for more transparency for everyone, and giving transparency and understanding to not just the few that have internal data analysts/experts anyways.
Hence we will evaluate next steps in terms of the Arbitrum Orbit.
I voted against this proposal. Despite thinking it has relevance, I feel that we would benefit of a more structured process where the DAO defines its needs.
We decided to vote against this proposal since we feel that other data providers will be willing to provide this data without the DAO having to expend funds. To prevent the DAO from spending on initiatives that have a high degree of overlap, this does not yet make much sense. As the Orbit ecosystem expands and as the chain begins to differentiate, it may be worthwhile to begin exploring newer dashboards with more specific or chain-dependent metrics. Generalized metrics are well-addressed by teams like L2Beat and DefiLlama. It may also be worth exploring this initiative through a grant program since the cost isn’t very cumbersome.
Voted FOR - Orbit is a mainstay of Arbitrum value and the costs seem reasonable given the expansive use cases we could see. Looking forward to seeing more details addressing the legit feedback provided (costs, why now vs later, etc).