Proposal: Experimental Incentive Program for Arbitrum Game Builders(for Discussion)

Hi @blanklee

First, I would like to mention that I’m a bit concerned that having “the largest treasury in the crypto space” is mentioned as a reason to spend, I think it’s something we should stop bringing up (both in this and the other proposals). Arbitrum DAO must take care of its treasury and its spending should be sustainable in the long term regardless of its size.

On the other hand, you have mentioned that this would be an experimental program, while I agree that the industry has potential, using almost 1% of the treasury in an “experiment” exclusively dedicated to gaming is overly generous as @Jl_DefiEdge said. To give some context, it has recently been voted to fund with 45.8M ARB a long-term incentives program that is iterating the STIP and is covering several arbitrum ecosystem verticals.

I honestly consider that we need to be careful about creating too many committees. While I think they are necessary, imagine having an exclusive grant program for each industry of the arbitrum ecosystem and each with its own committee.

Anyway, in this case, there are a few things to determine first, how many people could compose the committee? How much would be paid to each member?

How do you plan to implement this voting system?

I believe that the proposal in general lacks consideration of the follow-up of funded projects, as well as their duties to report updates. All of this is essential for the community to provide genuine feedback.

Finally, I suggest that instead of continuing to create isolated grant programs for different aspects of the ecosystem, we should focus on generating a framework that will serve as a basis for awarding grants throughout the entire arbitrum ecosystem.

This opinion is my own and does not reflect the one of SEEDLatam Gov.

1 Like