Grant funds may only be used to incentivize Arbitrum contracts and can not be used for to pay Quest Protocol as this appears to be an operational cost.
Hi @Matt_StableLab - I updated the proposal to make it clear that 100% of the ARB will be distributed through the QuestFactory contract in the Quest Protocol listed in the above proposal. Thank you!
Given the huge demand on the STIP i believe this grant should be significantly lowered if it seeks to pass. I think delegates will have a hard time justifying why 1m ARB on RabbitHole quests is a good bet for ecosystem growth when comparative questing platforms are seeking far lower.
Hi @flindy thanks for your concern. I scanned the list of proposals and I think you’re referring to Galxe’s proposal here which is lower and asking for 500k ARB.
While we’re a big fan of Galxe, I think it’s helpful to do a side-by-side comparison of the two proposals as it will paint a clear picture of why RabbitHole & Quest Protocol will yield greater results than Galxe for the Arbitrum DAO (in terms of # of transactions and net cost).
Here is a breakdown for you and other delegates:
| Galxe | RabbitHole | |
|---|---|---|
| Ask | 500K ARB | 1M ARB |
| KPI | 400k transactions (400K NFTs minted) | 2.7m transactions |
| CPA (Cost per action) | 1.25 ARB | 0.36 ARB |
| Est. Arbitrum network fees driven | $80,000 | $550,000 |
| Net cost to ArbitrumDAO (ARB distributed @ $0.90 per ARB - network fees generated) | $368,988 | $347,976.00 |
| Projects included | Any project that chooses to run a Galxe campaign (since Galxe is self-serve) | Projects curated by RabbitHole that benefit the Arbitrum ecosystem (included in the project above) |
| White-label Arbitrum quest platform | No | Yes |
Happy to answer any further questions above if anything is not clear!