Proposal for Financial Restitution For ArbitrumDAO Grant Winners

[Euphoria]

The following reflects the views of the Lampros DAO (formerly ‘Lampros Labs DAO’) governance team, composed of Chain_L (@Blueweb), @Euphoria, and Hirangi Pandya (@Nyx), based on our combined research, analysis, and ideation.

We are voting AGAINST this proposal in Snapshot voting.

We maintain our stance from the proposal discussion phase. While we deeply empathize with the challenges faced by these grantees, we cannot support a retrospective financial compensation mechanism that fundamentally contradicts the basic principles of token grant programs.

@Nyx

The following reflects the views of the Lampros Labs DAO governance team, composed of @Blueweb, @Euphoria, and Hirangi Pandya (@Nyx), based on our combined research, analysis, and ideation.

We empathize with you regarding the delays, costs, and the milestones that remain unachieved. We also appreciate the effort you’ve put into presenting the data, feedback, and this proposal to the DAO.

However, when it comes to financial restitution, we share @thedevanshmehta’s perspective. As grantees, receiving ARB tokens carries an inherent risk of price fluctuation, which all projects must account for. Price volatility is a natural part of grant programs, and if the price had increased, it’s unlikely you would have accepted a reduced amount of ARB tokens.

@DisruptionJoe and the Thrive team have thoroughly analyzed the process and highlighted the bottlenecks they encountered. While we all agree that there were inefficiencies, it’s important to recognize that this is a learning experience for everyone. It’s better to refine our processes through smaller grants than to repeat these mistakes with larger ones.