I have reservations about whether this proposal, as written, aligns with Arbitrum’s overall goal.
The core motivation seems to just be minting and handing out more ARB tokens, without clearly explaining how this will create tangible utility or value for the protocol. I worry it risks diluting the value of existing tokens through unnecessary inflation, without us regular users seeing meaningful benefits.
What concrete uses or alignment does this offer for those who aren’t already major ARB whales? The proposal lacks details on why minting these new tokens is so urgent right now, or how it substantially advances Arbitrum’s technical roadmap versus just rewarding passive holding.
My biggest concern is that perpetual inflation could seriously undermine long-term confidence in ARB’s scarcity and value. Without any compensating token sinks, the supply could keep expanding indefinitely. That gradual dilution could really hurt ARB’s upside potential.
I’m also skeptical about staking rewards being offered solely for passive holding, rather than active contributions that enrich the ecosystem. To me, that misaligns incentives by promoting unproductive rent-seeking rather than value creation. I worry it will attract profiteers rather than builders.
Frankly, I’m concerned that users may lose faith in ARB if the supply keeps ballooning without being tied to real platform usage and economic activity. Shouldn’t we reward contributions that strengthen Arbitrum, not just holding?
What really gave me pause is how the proposal frames inflation as a negligible “consideration” rather than a core design flaw. Also, the lack of any concrete plan to reduce reliance on inflation long-term seems shortsighted given the risks.
Hopefully, I explained my perspective clearly! I’m open to other views here.