(Posting on behalf of TreasureDAO as a member of its DAO council - Karel Vuong, Co-Founder.)
TreasureDAO will vote in favour of AIP-1.1.
As stated in our response to AIP-1, the issue for the Treasure community was never the proposed size of the Administrative Budget Wallet (ABW) nor did we have skepticism over Arbitrum’s intention in requesting this amount of ARB. We voted no and asked for a resubmitted proposal with more details about program types. Our rationale was ensuring that the earliest proposals enacted by ArbitrumDAO set a positive model for future governance. We believe AIP-1.1 creates a good example for governance best practices by providing more details on the ABW.
We believe $36 million is a reasonable operating budget over the next 12 months. Arbitrum is currently the leading L2 and competing with highly-capitalized organizations to maintain this spot. Arbitrum’s competitiveness hinges on further development of One, Nova, and Orbit, extensive business development to bring in the best projects, continued R&D in a space that is rapidly evolving, and so on.
This proposal offers sufficient clarification on the types of programs that would be supported by the ABW. Given the speed at which the industry is evolving, requesting further granularity than provided here would be unwise as it provides bad faith or uninformed actors a way through governance to prevent the Foundation from adapting allocations as necessary to remain technologically competitive. As we stated previously, the community should not have too much input into how funds are allocated towards technical or procurement programs. Holding ARB does not automatically qualify one to speak up about the costs or practicalities of blockchain development or even service provider relationships. Moreover, the vesting clause in this proposal is a sufficient safeguard and an improvement over AIP-1.