gm, thanks for putting out this proposal.
While I think having more and better data is valuable for the DAO, I don’t think we are at a stage where having that type of information can meaningfully help us to make decisions, so voting AGAINST.
The service that Karma provides today feels more than enough -
I would encourage dashboard-related initiatives to follow through more specific needs (ex: how are grants used).
I’m a big fan, thank you very much for the great proposal.
I am voting “FOR” on this proposal.
I share the concern of @gauntlet and @maxlomu about potential overlap with other initiatives; but, I will be honest, this is also the reason why we should likely have another source of truth about delegation, voting, activity and all things related to arbitrum governance. The delegate incentive program is becoming a key part of all the DAO, and @seedlatam could potentially see how there could be an integration with this new platform, or even suggest some tailored development to have quality of life upgrade. At the same time, we have live on snapshot the vote about staking arb from Tally. I easily see the potential opposition from some parties, concerned about current karma implementation, and a call for a second source of truth, or just an alternative to their system. And nothing against karma here on my side: just, if delegation and forum activity will become so important, it can make sense to have different parties track governance metrics in different ways.
So @Curia you got my support here. But please, when you will move to Tally, try to take in account all of the initiative above, to tailor current key initiatives in our dao; try also to have API implemented in a way that is functional to the data other parties might need as well. We are at the point in which we have a lot of good tools in our dao, but we need to make them work together in a better way 
Exciting initiative to enhance transparency with the Governance Analytics Dashboard. How will the dashboard ensure real-time accuracy and user accessibility? Are there any plans to integrate community feedback into its development?
Interesting proposal. I’m still interested in the $10k per month and how the monthly reports will be structured. Will this be integrated into Tally in some way? Or will the data be spread across different front-ends? I’m asking because I think it’s important for the information to be accessible in one place to make it easier for members and interested parties. How is this going to happen? Will we have a way to implement in other front-ends also?
I find the proposal quite interesting. The overall goals and benefits have great potential, however the specific KPIs to measure success of the dashboard are not explicitly mentioned.
I see the huge benefits of this proposal but I still have some doubts around the evaluation of the dashboard’s effectiveness.
How will you assess whether it has truly improved transparency and governance within the DAO? What specific KPIs will you track?
@maxlomu Thanks for taking the time to review the proposal and share your thoughts. We understand your perspective on the current stage of the DAO. However, we believe that the Governance Analytics Dashboard offers an opportunity to proactively equip the community with deeper insights and data-driven tools that can evolve as the DAO grows.
As we move forward and encounter more complex governance challenges, having a robust analytics infrastructure will be crucial. It will allow us to make more informed decisions, identify trends early, and optimize our processes.
Additionally, the dashboard can indeed be tailored to specific needs, such as tracking Redelegation Week, how many people we’ve onboarded to become delegates, how many people have redelegated, and other key metrics that the community deems important. By having this tool in place, we’ll be in a stronger position to adapt to the DAO’s evolving needs without having to start from scratch when the demand for such insights becomes more pressing.
We would appreciate it if you could reconsider your vote in light of these points. We’re also open to discussing how the dashboard can better address specific concerns or needs you might have.
Thanks @JOJO & @danimim for your support and thoughtful feedback on our proposal!
We’re open to integrating this data into Tally and other front-ends, as mentioned in our proposal. Additionally, we will offer an API for community use, ensuring that the information can be easily accessed and utilized across various platforms.Our goal is to create a dashboard that not only serves as an alternative but also provides an additional source of truth by tracking governance metrics that supports the ArbitrumDAO’s Governance. We’re excited to work together to make our tools more cohesive and effective for the community!
The $10k budget is allocated for producing six monthly reports, providing detailed insights into governance metrics.
Here is the example of our report for SafeDAO: SafeDAO Governance Analytic Report Thread
@DevSwaroop Thank you for your feedback! We’re excited to bring this initiative to life and enhance governance data transparency within ArbitrumDAO. The dashboard will update daily to ensure the data is accurate and relevant. We’re committed to incorporating community feedback and adjusting metrics based on ongoing initiatives to keep the dashboard valuable and relevant with the needs of the Arbitrum community.
Thank you @0x_ultra for your interest in the proposal! To evaluate the dashboard’s effectiveness in enhancing transparency and governance within the DAO, we will track specific KPIs, including:
We’ve worked together with Curia team before and can attest to the quality of their work. We think the overall scope and costs are pretty reasonable given the size of the DAO and the amount of entities they’ll review.
The potential overlap of initiatives is certainly a concern, and will see how this plays out over the next few months.
Hey @Curia , thank you very much for the proposal.
I like the tool and believe it could add value to the DAO in the medium term. However, I agree with @maxlomu that we are not yet at that point, and as it is currently designed, it risks overlapping with other initiatives like the one from @SEEDGov and Karma.
Additionally, I think that initiatives with a low budget request should go through the appropriate channel, such as the Domain Allocator, where someone is responsible for conducting a deeper iteration and working together with the applicant to assess the DAO’s state and the needs to develop the most efficient tool.
For all these reasons, I am voting AGAINST, though I encourage the team to submit the request to the Domain Allocator.
After consideration, Treasure’s Arbitrum Representative Council (ARC) would like to share the following feedback on the proposal
We voted AGAINST this proposal.
This was a difficult decision, especially given the high calibre and quality of the Curia team. However, as others have pointed out, we noticed significant overlap with other initiatives. As a result, we were uncertain about the added value this dashboard would bring to inform decision-making.
We also agree strongly with the following observation from @pedrob:
We extend our warmest wishes to the Curia team and look forward to future opportunities for collaboration when the time feels more right.
I love the initiative, but I understand that we’ve been using Karma for the past few months within the DAO.
Is it worth replicating these efforts?
Given the amount they’re asking for, shouldn’t this be a domain allocator one?
I voted against this proposal.
Hi @pedrob, @Pepperoni_Jo3, @ocandocrypto
Thank you all for your thoughtful feedback on our proposal.
We understand the concerns about potential overlap with the Karma team’s work on delegate incentives. However, we believe our focus is distinct, as we cover broader governance metrics such as Voting Power Concentration, Holder & Delegation trends, Proposal Dynamics, and Participation Analysis. These insights go beyond delegate incentives, offering a comprehensive view of the overall governance ecosystem in Arbitrum. We see this as a critical step in enhancing transparency and addressing an underserved area in governance.
We’re committed to making our data both actionable and accessible. To achieve this, we are providing monthly reports that distill key insights and trends from the dashboard. In addition, we’re also open to integrating our data into Tally and other platforms. As mentioned in the proposal, we’ll also offer a Public API for broader community use. Our goal is to provide governance data that not only serves as an alternative but also offers an additional source of truth for ArbitrumDAO’s governance.
We align with @JoJo’s view on the growing importance of the delegate incentive program and future governance initiatives, which makes it crucial to have multiple sources of truth regarding governance data eg. delegation, voting, and governance activities. Diversifying data sources for tracking governance metrics ensures a more robust and transparent governance process. Our experience with the Optimism Collective illustrates how having multiple sources can have a positive impact. For instance, while providing similar services for Optimism, we identified inconsistencies in their retro governance participation rewards from the OP Foundation for the past two seasons. Several delegates were not recognized for their contributions, but with our work, we were able to audit these cases and successfully advocate for reevaluation Season 4 & Season 5.
Regarding the grants program, we chose not to pursue it because we aim to establish a long-term relationship with Arbitrum as a provider of high-quality governance data services. We believe this approach is more sustainable, given the ongoing costs of processing, querying data, and adapting to the upcoming governance initiatives.
We hope this helps clarify our position and would love to explore how we can better align our efforts with the needs of ArbitrumDAO. Thank you again for your feedback, and we hope this builds a strong enough case for you to reconsider your stance on this initiative.
I voted FOR this proposal at the temp check stage for the reasons outlined here.
After consideration, the @SEEDgov delegation has decided to vote “FOR” on this proposal at the Snapshot vote.
SEEDGov acknowledges that while valid concerns have been raised regarding the overlap of certain information—particularly metrics related to delegates—it is evident that the dashboard proposed by Curia offers other complementary data and visualizations.
To elaborate, Karma has indeed made significant contributions to the Delegate Incentives Program and will continue to do so during an eventual extension and renewal of the program. However, the reality is that Curia’s dashboard incorporates other metrics on Participation, Proposals, and Voting Power that no other service currently contracted by Arbitrum DAO covers. While there is some overlap regarding delegate metrics, the dashboard appears to provide complementary information that could be highly valuable to the DAO.
We would also like to echo @JoJo’s sentiment: it would be beneficial for the DAO to have multiple sources of information, as this promotes the diversification of services across different providers.
@Curia thanks for answering my question.
Even though I like this initiative, after consideration I decided to vote against this proposal. I think that for the moment Karma is already providing a good service and your initiative also risks to overlap with other programs, as many others mentioned.
The proposal and budget appear reasonable given the size of the DAO. The Curia team seems well-qualified for the task, and I look forward to seeing it implemented.
This proposal is a smart investment in ArbitrumDAO’s future. By creating a dedicated analytics dashboard, it offers a practical tool for better governance, ensuring decisions are backed by clear, actionable data. This approach not only strengthens transparency but also helps the community stay ahead of potential issues, making it a valuable step towards more effective and resilient governance.
We will be voting “Abstain” as it is our proposal.
I’m all for this proposal. An Arbitrum DAO Governance Analytics Dashboard is exactly what we need to boost transparency and make better decisions. It’ll help us track governance activity, safeguard against attacks, and improve overall participation. This tool will make governance more accessible and effective for everyone in the community.
We vote FOR the proposal on Snapshot.
We believe better understanding of the governance and delegates is critical for the DAO to improve its governance and evaluate the ongoing programs (e.g. Delegate Incentive Program). Regarding the overlap on the tools, we consider the proposed dashboard is more for retroactive analysis on the governance while Karma is to capture snapshots of how the delegates perform, thus they can exist and complement each other.