Fantastic! I have sent you a message on twitter for a direct contact.
4 Likes
Hi! Thanks for your proposal!
I share the concerns that the initial funding seems too high, and I like the suggestion of reviewing it and the introduction of retro-grants.
One question: How would be the selection process for the grant committee reviewers? Is it something that will go through a vote?
2 Likes
Fantastic proposal, @helloshreyas!
This is Abhay from DappLooker. Having received Aave DAO grants three times, I am well-acquainted with the process and its significance. I would be thrilled to contribute to the Arbitrum DAO as a data and analytics partner, leveraging my expertise to build real-time dashboards.
We already have Arbitrum network integration for no-code on chain analysis and dashboards.
Additionally, if I meet the criteria, I would also love to participate as a reviewer.
2 Likes
Thank you! Weâre having conversations with potential reviewers and participants right now. This will help select the initial group of reviewers as well as inform how the eventual proposal should be shaped.
The goal is to build a relatively diverse set of reviewers with backgrounds in engineering, risk, analytics, DeFi, NFTs, social/gaming, and governance. We are looking for reviewers who have demonstrated clear aptitude to judge developer grants, make informed grant allocations, work well in a group, and have a strong interest in growing Arbitrum. After narrowing down a core group, we will share it on the forum, put up the revised proposal with the list of reviewers for a vote on Snapshot, and potentially host a Twitter spaces for wider discussion and feedback.
2 Likes
Appreciate it! Will reach out to schedule a call.
2 Likes
Elephant in the room here is the other grants program that had a snapshot which was in favor. AIP - 3 [Non-Constitutional] Fund the Arbitrum Grants Framework Proposal Milestone 1
Why discuss another grants program when a bigger one is already voted in?
Which also already will run while Questbook is also another grants program on Arbitrum?
Do we really need multiple grant programs people?
Multiple Arbitrum members and delegates have shown an interest in there being multiple grants programs. As long as the budget is reasonable and the process for grantees is smooth, this could let the DAO assess which programs it would like to retain, test what types of projects are suited for funding via a grants program, and how the funding system can be improved overall. Regarding size, we are getting feedback from more community members and will put up a revised proposal with reduced size and scope. If other programs are approved, we will work with them to ensure alignment on scope and build out an efficient process for grantees.
4 Likes
Hello @helloshreyas thanks for your ideas. I am Tony from The Insider Group, we are a media community and support for ecosystems like Near, Arbitrum, etc and and at Near I joined the Grant DAO model like this. I have some contributions as follows:
- Form a committee of 5 people (these people will review the proposal and decide if it is eligible for approval, 3/5 votes will make the proposal approved), we need to discuss to set the recruitment criteria for 5 people for the council
- Establish Marketing DAO: this will be the place where projects can submit their proposals for funding. And first we need to set up a few things:
- Proposal submission process (time, form, KPI, evaluation criteria, etc)
- Payment process
Also I recommend a maximum funding budget for 1 month is $100K, and maximum funding amount for 1 project is $5K per month. Depending on each proposal and set goals of the projects
Finally, the categories I recommend for funding: Social Media (communities that contribute educationally through content, videos, images, etc) and defi projects
5 Likes
Hello @helloshreyas,
I find the idea intriguing, as it certainly has the potential to benefit the ARB ecosystem. I am currently striving to comprehend the technical linkage between the ARB DAO and the Grant DAO â do they exhibit any form of interrelation? Furthermore, what measures are in place to avert the occurrence of a malicious attack? Could you elaborate on how we intend to monitor on-chain decisions effectively?
Best regards,
Ohad
Chelo Labs
5 Likes
@Ohad_Chelo_Labs thank you for your comment. The way Llama works: policies are issued to individuals (grant reviewers) and smart contracts (Arbitrumâs governor contract). Rules and guardrails are set onchain for transferring funds. For example, amounts below $20k need approval from two reviewers, amounts between $20k and $70k need approval from 20% of the grants DAO, and large amounts need approval from the DAO tokenholders. These numbers are just an example and the rules can be configured in a different way. The goal is to ensure that grantees have a straightforward process while incorporating secure guardrails so that the DAOâs funds are allocated effectively.
1 Like
@arbitrum.insider thank you for your interest! Will follow up when we have more details.
Quick general update: we have received a lot of interest in this proposal! We are soliciting more feedback and revising a few items including scope and budget. We will share this on the forum when it is ready. We want to make sure that this grants program is value additive to Arbitrum DAO in addition to the two programs that have been proposed earlier.
1 Like
Thank you @helloshreyas for your prompt response. However, when looking at on-chain interactions, there doesnât seem to be a true integration between the ARB DAO and the Grant DAO. For instance, hypothetically speaking, if the ARB DAO were to send 1 million USDC (or any other assets) to the Grant DAO, and the Grant DAO then decided to transfer, say, 50k each time to an individualâs personal wallet or even to a fictitious address, thereâs nothing the main ARB DAO could do to prevent this. Essentially, the ARB DAO could just see its funds drained without recourse, correct?
2 Likes
We can set up the grants program to ensure security and flexibility for the DAO:
- The DAO approves the transfer of funds so doesnât actually transfer the whole amount; the grants org withdraws the amounts as it needs to spend grants.
- The DAO retains the right to stop the transfer of future funds at any time and can also clawback funds that have been sent to the grants org.
- For example, say the grants DAO has misallocated $50k and the DAO wants to end the grants program. Through a proposal, the DAO can prevent the transfer of all the remaining funds to the grants program and clawback any additional funds that the grants org has.
TLDR: the DAO can audit what is happening in real-time and can cancel the program and clawback funds if it chooses to. Please note that this gives the DAO more rights and protections than almost any major protocol grants program in the crypto ecosystem. Usually, the DAO just hands over funds to a multisig to spend as they see fit. No grant program requires tokenholder vote on every decision as that would be highly cumbersome and not optimal for tokenholders, reviewers, or grantees.
1 Like
Thank @helloshreyas for the explanation. Weâve developed something truly innovative called âBlocâ (previously known as Mini DAO, as detailed here: Bloc article). Our goal is to instill full security and on-chain trust into the Grant DAO, addressing potential gaps. I would be pleased to share more information and explore how we can assist in structuring the idea of the Grant DAO. Overall, I believe itâs a fantastic concept, and I fully support it.
2 Likes
fyi your article is medium pay-walled. Cant read it.
1 Like
Oh let me fix it, here you can read Decentralized Autonomous Organizations Made Easy with Bloc (prev⌠â Ohad Bachner
2 Likes
3 Likes
I look forward to the DAO