The following reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking, and ideation of the two.
We’re voting FOR the proposal.
The concept of a Stylus Sprint will be a good way to introduce more developers to Stylus and Arbitrum. While we support the direction, we want to raise three points that we believe are important for the proposal’s success.
- Frequent Communication
The Evaluation Committee should be in constant communication with both the DAO and the wider community. On the DAO side, we’d like to be regularly updated on the program’s progress, both in terms of the quantity and quality of applicants and on challenges the program might be facing at different times. In terms of community, we want to ensure that potential builders are fully aware of the Stylus Sprint, how they can get involved, where to go, who to talk with, etc.
- Rigorous Documentation
The Stylus Sprint is essentially a targeted grants program, and as with other grants programs, we want to see rigorous documentation of all the relevant information, from the assessment rubric, all the way to the grants distributed and the milestones each project has. The reason we want to see this documentation -apart from oversight- is because we want to catalogue learnings so we can apply them in other similar programs in the future.
- Continuous Marketing of the Stylus Sprint
This goes hand-in-hand with the ‘frequent communication’ point mentioned above. It’s important that the Stylus Sprint is marketed far and wide to attract as many quality applications as possible. We want to avoid a situation where there’s only a small push around the beginning of the program, only to be followed by months of quietness. To that end, coordination should be made across the DAO, AF, and OCL to leverage all available communication channels.