[RFC] Fund The Stylus Sprint

Proposals
41

We’re voting FOR the Stylus Sprint funding proposal.

This program smartly leverages Arbitrum’s first-mover advantage with Stylus, potentially drawing top protocols from WASM ecosystems like Solana. The RFP track targeting specific tooling needs shows foresight. Engaging OpenZeppelin for evaluation adds credibility. The milestone-based funding and open-source requirements mitigate risks while maximizing community benefit.

42

I voted FOR this proposal at the temp check stage. Stylus is one of Arbitrum’s key competitive advantages, and I think it’s appropriate for the DAO to play a direct role in driving adoption. I agree with the focus on developer tooling and infra as the key to fully unlocking the potential of Stylus, and think 5M ARB is a reasonable place to start in terms of program sizing.

1 Like
43

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 are voting FOR the proposal.

Stylus is already a huge differentiator between Arbitrum and other L2s and will potentially enable thousands of developers to build on/for Arbitrum without having to know solidity. Creating and funding a Stylus Sprint is a great opportunity to build on the momentum of Stylus’ launch and offer support to builders looking to come to Arbitrum.

Having said that, some points should be discussed before the proposal is submitted for an on-chain vote.

For example, we need clarifications on the current committee setup and compensation. While we are not against committee members getting paid and not waiving their compensation, we’re curious why they are getting paid for 15 months (60 weeks) when the work outlined is spread over 12 weeks. What are the expectations from a time commitment and resources perspective for the remaining 48 weeks that justify a 5,000 ARB monthly compensation for the entire sprint duration?

Additionally, since 2 of the committee members are from OpenZeppelin, does that mean that OpenZeppelin will be excluded from participating in the sprint? If so, is it good for the program to have one of the most competent teams excluded?

Last but not least, we’re not convinced about the decision to award the grantees using ARB instead of stables, especially when the grants are to be made in milestones that might span up to a year and the grant is probably supposed to cover development costs. We are aware of the challenges that come with converting ARB to stables, and we understand that having awards in ARB is meant to create alignment but it’s worth discussing it more before the onchain vote since:

  • Grantees will probably need to sell ARB to cover the costs anyway
  • If ARB’s price continues to decline, grantees might end up not be interested to finish the projects they started due to costs significantly exceeding expected payout.
  • Questbook uses $ denominations, not ARB - is it even possible to denominate grants in ARB using Questbook? The worst solution would be to denominate grants in $ but pay in ARB, as we’ve already experienced several times already.

Overall, we’re supportive of the direction, but we want to address the aforementioned points before voting in favor of the proposal onchain.

1 Like
44

The results are in for the Fund the Stylus Sprint off-chain proposal.

See how the community voted and more Arbitrum stats:

45

The proposal has now passed with over 97% in favor of moving forward with the Stylus Sprint! Thank you all for the well-thought-out feedback and support for the proposal. We will be pushing the timeline back 1-2 weeks before moving to Tally to address some very valid feedback around necessary, albeit minor, changes to the proposal. Changes that will likely be made include:

  • An inclusion of a rough draft of the application template and grading rubric. A high-quality application template will be of the utmost importance in the likely scenario that the program is a major success with more applicants than expected. These will be clear and strict, and applicant non-compliance consequences (ineligibility) will be enforced.
  • An additional member of the evaluation committee will be added to the program. Specifically, we will be looking to add a member with existing experience in the DAO’s grants programs. With 6 total members, we’ll ensure that the program has a tie breaker mechanism or attempt to add a 7th member as well.
  • Though we will not add a “cap” to the max request, we will make clear that larger requests over 10% of the budget, that are deemed quality, have a likelihood of being sent to the DAO instead of included in the program dependent on the total ARB requested in the program and quality of the applications.
  • We may opt to enable USD denominated requests from applicants, though this will require more discussion with delegates before being an included change. There is a tradeoff in this approach but could be addressed by sending ARB first to a foundation-controlled address for conversion.

Additional considerations:

  • A marketing push is currently being coordinated with members of Arbitrum’s marketing community. This is a major focus of the program and will not be ignored. We appreciate so many astutely pointing out its importance, we agree. This has been in the works since even before the proposal’s completion and we apologize for not giving more clarity or insight into it being worked on. Additionally, a big component of the success of the program will be community members reaching out to their networks: whether protocols or traditional devs well fit for the program so we would like to call on all to help out bolstering the applicant pool.
  • Regarding the comment about vulnerabilities, the OZ critical bug is in the SDK not Stylus itself. Teams are already shipping with Stylus today without hindrance. Additionally, the SDK is expected to be completed (and shipped) within the next few weeks (before the Sprint would start).
  • This proposal will be utilizing the MSS. Per the language of the proposal “Funds will be sent to an MSS-secured multisig,” but there is clearly a miscommunication on our part since many read it differently, so this will be addressed more clearly, directly, and without room for misunderstanding. Language will be included around the “Payment Approver” role as well to make sure the MSS has all necessary information.
  • RPGF is something we considered along with many other ideas for verticals to include in the program but we decided to hone in the focus of the proposal and not try to do everything at once. There is a lot of work to be done to make Stylus a tech stack anyone can easily use with proper incentives and this proposal by no means will solve them all. That said, it’s a kickstart to getting some of the most pertinent work done. One solution could be budgeting an extra amount of ARB, maybe 2.5M, for the RPGF in this same proposal so it can already be marketed. Then we can figure out specifics at some point in the future regarding how we’ll distribute those funds which would require an additional Snapshot proposal. This is just an idea, but we will explore if it is something that the DAO desires.
  • The 5000 ARB per month per member of the evaluation committee will likely be substandard pay at the beginning of the program (12 weeks) and high pay for the rest while milestones greenlighting becomes the majority of the scope of work. We will model out the expected workload per evaluation committee member over the whole program (in different scenarios dependent on # of applicants) tied to the current USD valuation of the total pay.
3 Likes
46

About the vulnerabilities found in the report; the Evaluation Committee should take them into account as well as developers: Read about them here: Stylus Rust SDK Audit

Just to be extra careful!

To note also: Stylus Security Education: Workshops, Community, and Audit Contest Stylus Security Education: Workshops, Community, and Audit Contest

1 Like
47

I’m all for the Stylus Sprint program—this is a smart move for Arbitrum! One of the things that stands out to me is the focus on Rust, which has been gaining serious traction in the developer community. Rust is known for its performance and safety, and more devs are picking it up. Bringing Rust into the fold with Stylus makes Arbitrum more appealing to a broader group of developers.

Is a big step toward attracting top-tier developers who may not have considered Arbitrum before. The multi-language support through Stylus really sets Arbitrum apart, and it’s exciting to see how this could lead to innovative new projects.

Overall, this is a fantastic opportunity for Arbitrum to stay ahead in the competitive rollup space. By encouraging early development with Rust, the Stylus Sprint is sure to drive growth and adoption, bringing in fresh ideas and talent to the ecosystem. I’m excited to see where this goes!

48

I’m in favor, but I do have a few questions:

  1. Details on the evaluation criteria:

    • How exactly will the evaluation committee assess subjective standards like “innovation potential” and “market readiness”? Is there a detailed scoring system or guidelines for this?

  2. Funds distribution and milestone setup:

    • If a team fails to meet milestones within the set timeframe or progresses slowly, are there specific actions or penalties in place?

  3. Transparency of the application process:

    • Will the review process be open and transparent? Can other teams or community members see the details of the applications and the feedback from the reviews?

  4. Flexibility in budget and funds usage:

    • During the project, if there’s a shortage of funds or if the budget is exceeded, are there any measures or mechanisms for additional funding?

  5. Ongoing support and oversight:

    • After the projects are completed, is there a plan to continue supporting these teams to ensure the long-term success and sustainability of their projects?
2 Likes
49

Voted in favour to this proposal. Funding this initiative also ensures that developers/teams have the resources needed to deliver, benefiting both the technical community, users and ecosystem in the long run

1 Like
50

I’m in favor of funding Stylus-oriented initiatives as they align with the broader goal of driving developer engagement on Arbitrum, which is critical for long-term ecosystem growth.
The proposal outlines a clear milestone-based structure, which is excellent for maintaining accountability.

However, I echo concerns about ensuring strong transparency reports, as mentioned by other delegates, to guarantee that progress remains aligned with the DAO’s goals and expectations. Additionally, clearer metrics for long-term sustainability should be prioritized.

51

Below are the opinions of the UADP:

We voted For this proposal since it allows Arbitrum to double-down on factors that enable the L2 to differentiate itself from its peers. The flexibility provisioned by Stylus allows for builders from different ecosystems to consider developing on Arbitrum, taking advantage of the existing network effects surrounding liquidity and applications. The Entropy team has addressed concerns around tracking and KPIs, which is in our eyes the number one concern with these grant programs. Long-term continuation and awareness of the program are the following concerns. It’s good to see that marketing is not overlooked. The beauty of Stylus is that outreach to developers not just in the blockchain space but also in other areas can yield strong traction for Arbitrum. We’d like to see a concerted effort around attaining and thereafter retaining talent that’s drawn from this program. The scope for who is targeted during outreach can be wider than other grant programs as well. As for a RPGF initiative for sustaining talent, this can be addressed in a follow up proposal—but the team should begin outlining this structure over the next couple of months. Ecosystems like Solana have increased their liquidity, base-level tech, and ecosystem vibrancy over the past year. Builders truly need an incentive and a roadmap to continue building in a particular ecosystem. If Arbitrum isn’t able to provide that kind of support, the builders will simply journey to where the incentives are compelling.

1 Like
52

Vote: FOR

Type and Proposal Link: Snapshot –> Fund the Stylus Sprint

Voting Rationale Link: Alex Lumley (Savvy DAO) Delegate Communication Thread - #20 by AlexLumley

=== COMMENTING ON PROPOSAL: ===

While the Stylus Sprint funding proposal is an exciting initiative for driving developer adoption, a few important considerations could enhance the program. First, the timeline between approval and the start of the sprint is tight, and a budget for marketing would help attract high-quality developers before the application window opens. Additionally, clearer guidelines around milestone completion, oversight, and potential consequences for non-compliance would improve transparency and accountability. Lastly, the use of a new multisig needs clarification, as the existing DAO multisig could be leveraged for better cohesion and trust.

53

Missed this vote unfortunately, but would have Voted FOR :frowning:

The operational costs are very low and the encouragement for teams to start testing / using Stylus is a great opportunity.

Suggestion: we should work with marketing resources from the foundation / OCL to really capture the accomplishments of this initiative so that it is a splash vs a small drop of attention - the tech needs more eyes on it :slight_smile:

54

Thank you for everyone’s patience as our team made updates to the Stylus Sprint. We are excited to be moving this forward to Tally on Monday, October 7th so that the vote begins Thursday, October 10th. Below is a summary of changes made to the proposal based on delegate feedback:

  • Additional Evaluation Committee Member: @SEEDGov and @JoJo have agreed to join the evaluation committee. They bring extensive experience in DAO grant programs and will help round out the committee with additional perspectives/backgrounds. The evaluation committee will therefore be made of 7 members, with several individuals contributing to help manage bandwidth concerns.
  • Soft Request “Cap”: Language was added in the Specifications section that specifies a soft request “cap” of 500k ARB (10% of the program budget), which is dependent on the total ARB requested in the program. Applicants requesting greater than 500k ARB may be sent to the DAO directly. This is in lieu of creating a max request “cap” which would have created a disincentive for highly qualified teams from applying.
  • MSS-controlled Multi-sig: Additional clarification has been added that funds will be managed by a MSS controlled multi-sig along with Entropy Advisors acting in an “approver” role to process payments to winning applicants once KYC has been completed.
  • Flexibility in Milestone Structure: Language has been revised to allow applicants to propose their own milestone structure. This decision was also made after taking into account that requests will be denominated in ARB. Due to the volatile nature of ARB, we felt it was important for applicants to have the flexibility to request certain milestone structures. However, it should be noted that the evaluation committee will prioritize applicants that backload payment distribution over those that request high percentages upfront.

Additional rationale for other points of feedback and concerns raised by delegates:

  • Retroactive Funding: After discussions with a few delegates and further consideration internally, our team has decided to continue forward with the Stylus Sprint without a retrospective funding component. We do recognize that incentivizing post-program sustainability of the projects and tooling created is important. If it is deemed necessary during the Stylus Sprint that a RPGF component will be necessary to ensure sustainability, then a separate snapshot requesting additional funding along with specifications can be put forth.
  • USD Denominated Requests: After consideration, applicants will only be able to request payments denominated in ARB. This is to prevent the possibility of a payment shortfall, which the DAO has experienced with previous USD denominated requests paid out in ARB. Questbook has confirmed that their platform can take requests in ARB.
  • Application Template and Grading Rubric: Both of these items are still a work in progress but a draft will be presented to the DAO by the start of the program, which is October 28th, dependent on the passing of the onchain vote. We appreciate the recommendations from delegates about requiring certain information like metrics for success (KPIs) and a post-program sustainability plan. Creating a high-quality application template is of the utmost importance and will require the input of all the evaluation committee.
  • Modeling Committee Work Hours: While we expect most of the Evaluation Committee’s work to be in the first 3 months of the program, our team believes it is important for the paid members to feel properly compensated for their time and expertise. In a scenario where there are a limited number of applicants, Entropy has communicated that it may be appropriate to adjust the pay structure in the later months of the program. Entropy will be responsible for raising any concerns to the DAO of potential overpay based on the amount of work occurring.
  • Marketing Plan: Properly marketing the Stylus Sprint is also of utmost importance. Existing Arbitrum marketing teams have already agreed to help promote the program in the following manner:
    • Create a blog.arbitrum.io post
    • Link posts on arbitrum.io/stylus
    • Place advert on banners across Arbiscan and other Arbitrum URLs
    • Amplify on official Arbitrum socials accounts + create specific assets
3 Likes
55

The Fund the Stylus Sprint proposal has been posted to Tally; voting will begin this Thursday. Thank you to the delegates who provided feedback between the temperature check and onchain voting phase.

If the proposal passes, 5,330,000 ARB will be transferred to a MSS controlled multi-sig, which can be verified in the MSS communication thread:

2 Likes
56

Voting has started for this proposal!
Vote on Tally: Fund the Stylus Sprint

I am a bot. Questions? Contact support@tally.xyz

2 Likes
57

I’m reaffirming my vote from the temp-check and voting FOR on Tally. As I mentioned earlier, this program has the right incentives to enhance the launch and adoption of Stylus. I also appreciate the recent additions to the proposal, including the use of MSS as a multisig and the inclusion of SEEDGov and Jojo as committee members, which will bring diverse perspectives to the table.

58

Voting for. I reiterate the remarks that I previously made on the forum. This proposal will certainly attract new developers in the ecosystem, which is a key element for the DAO.

59

Stylus is something that has never been seen in the web3 world before, and it deserves everyone’s attention. Moreover, we should do our best to reduce the threshold of web3. This is not just for applications, but also for developers.

60

Excited to be part of this and to contribute if it passes! And for this reason: