Allow me to commence by stating that this proposition has indeed sparked a wave of individuals, myself included, to establish accounts and actively participate in the forum. I believe this to be a significant stride in the right direction for Arbitrum.
Furthermore, it’s worth noting that I am a holder of $ARB, $GRAIL, as well as other projects on Arbitrum such as $JONES and $PLUTUS, among others.
It appears that many individuals are reacting solely to the quantity without taking the time to actually peruse the proposal. Yes, 12 million ARB tokens may appear substantial, but when utilized to directly benefit numerous Arbitrum protocols, it becomes a reasonable allocation. It’s crucial to consider that this amount is a fraction of the treasury’s total holdings, which stands at a staggering 4 billion tokens. Please, do clarify why 12 million is deemed excessive. Why not 20 million? Examine the multitude of projects this allocation will support, and then attempt to provide a rational response. Several of the responses received thus far border on low-level spam or, at best, mere trolling.
There have been multiple instances where it has been questioned why Camelot is being granted such an advantage and why other DEXs are not being treated equally. If there exist other DEXs that can demonstrate a track record of supporting the ecosystem and onboarding as many protocols as Camelot, I wholeheartedly encourage their supporters to come forth and share their achievements. All DEXs are not created equal, so why should they be treated as such?
Consider this: granting an equal amount of incentives to Uniswap or Traderjoe, for instance, would benefit whom exactly? While Camelot may not boast the highest trading volume, it has undeniably established itself as the native ecosystem DEX, devoting considerable effort to supporting other protocols. No other DEX has exerted such a substantial impact on the native ecosystem. While Uniswap, TJ, and Sushi have undoubtedly contributed to the growth of various chains, their efforts in supporting Arbitrum have been commensurate with those expended on other networks. These protocols are commendable, but they do not possess the same level of commitment to the native ecosystem.
Arbitrum’s network effects are what will solidify its position as the foremost Layer 2 solution. These effects materialize when builders collaborate, as exemplified by Camelot’s Round Table.
Once again, I implore all those individuals who claim that “Camelot does not deserve it” to elucidate who, in their opinion, does deserve it? Denying Camelot a grant would send a dubious signal to builders who wholeheartedly dedicate themselves to advancing the ecosystem.
The argument presented is clear:
- The Arbitrum DAO possesses a substantial number of tokens that must be allocated for the growth and expansion of the ecosystem.
- I have yet to encounter another protocol as focused on supporting the ecosystem as Camelot. The sheer number of protocols that Camelot has aided and introduced to the ecosystem solidifies my support for this proposal.
- If you can identify a protocol that can distribute tokens more effectively and drive significant growth, please urge them to submit a grant proposal. Furthermore, encourage them to suggest an appropriate amount. Would 12 million ARB tokens be deemed excessive in light of your personal biases?
- If you genuinely believe that 12 million ARB tokens are excessive, I implore you to present a compelling argument as to why. Considering the number of protocols this allocation will support, I am inclined to believe that it is, in fact, too conservative.
- In today’s landscape, technological superiority is no longer sufficient. Countless Layer 1 and Layer 2 solutions are vying for both users and builders. While Arbitrum holds a strong position, it must capitalize on opportunities like this to foster further expansion.
- If 12 million ARB tokens are deemed excessive and Camelot is deemed unworthy, I eagerly await alternative suggestions for their allocation. Failing to pass this proposal would send an extremely pessimistic signal to the rest of the ecosystem, potentially driving users and builders toward platforms where resources are already actively being utilized.
I will be voting FOR this proposal.
'Tis akin to beholding a grandiose saga unfolding within the realm of cryptocurrency. “Monopolize the entirety of the ecosystem,” thou sayest. Ah, now that dwelleth within the realm of malevolent super-villainy. 
I can almost envision the wicked mastermind behind Camelot, gleefully plotting to conquer the world!
'Tis genuinely heartwarming to behold such magnanimity in action. Who needs equitable competition when one can revel in a monopoly, prithee?
For who hath need of foolish notions when wisdom and clarity illume the path?