[RFC] Fund The Stylus Sprint

[jameskbh]

I voted FOR on Tally. The reasoning remains the same.

[TodayInDeFi]

We’re Voting FOR the proposal

• Rationale
  • Strategic Allocation of Funds
    • Clear objective to accelerate the development and adoption of Arbitrum Stylus with the potential to significantly enhance Arbitrum’s capabilities and competitiveness
    • The allocation of 5,000,000 ARB, while a significant amount, is strategically directed towards attracting developers and building essential infrastructure which aligns with the long-term interests of the Arbitrum ecosystem
  • Well-Defined Evaluation Process
    • Robust and transparent evaluation process for grant applications
    • Evaluation Committee, comprising experts from Offchain Labs and OpenZeppelin with relevant expertise in Stylus, ensures that applications are assessed based on their technical merit and potential for impact
    • inclusion of SEEDGov and JoJo, experienced in DAO grant programs, adds further credibility to the selection process
    • The emphasis on transparency, with public rationale provided for all application decisions, promotes accountability
  • Focus on Sustainability and Long-Term Growth
    • Emphasis on milestone-based funding, with a preference for backloaded payment schedules, incentivizes sustained development and reduces the risk of wasted funds

Feedback and nice to haves:

• Lack of Concrete Metrics for Success
  • While increased Stylus adoption is a primary goal, defining quantifiable targets for factors like the number of developers, projects, and users onboarded through the program would provide a clearer picture of its impact and return on investment
• Limited Insight into RFP Development
  • The proposal provides examples of potential RFP categories but does not fully elaborate on how these RFPs will be developed, finalized, or made publicly accessible

[pedrob]

I am voting FOR this proposal on Tally.

As I stated when expressing my vote during the temp-check stage, I strongly support this proposal and the allocation of DAO funds to incentivize the development of Stylus smart contracts.

@Entropy

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.

I’m also in favor of including members with experience in Grant Programs, and I personally know @SEEDGov and @JoJo —both are more than qualified to serve on the committee, and I believe they will perform their duties excellently.

However, I’m not entirely convinced of the need for the committee to consist of seven members. If everyone is going to vote on everything, they’ll have different perspectives, which could cause delays in coordination. Additionally, I don’t see a well-justified reason for having such a large committee. Is my understanding that there is no certainty about the expected number of applications.

@Entropy

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.

One of the technical positions could have been removed and replaced with someone experienced in grant programs if that was the intention.

@Entropy

The evaluation committee will therefore be made of 7 members, with several individuals contributing to help manage bandwidth concerns.

On the other hand, if there is a concern regarding the bandwidth of the committee members, it is not sufficiently justified in the proposal to expand the committee without much discussion on the matter (at least publicly). How many applications are you expecting? What tasks and weekly hours will be required of the committee members?

@Entropy

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

This is fantastic, thank you for including it!

Many thanks for leading and driving this proposal, which I believe is highly relevant for the future of Arbitrum. The questioned modifications are not enough reason for me to vote against it, so my support remains as it was during the temp-check stage.

However, I would like to reiterate my previous comments on the following matter:

@pedrob

One of the most difficult things to manage is oversight of the development process. I recommend having very clear rules regarding deadlines, milestone completion, potential reports (as others have suggested), and the consequences of failing to meet them. The LTIPP and B.STIP programs were too lenient with non-compliance, as there were no clear control roles or consequences.

Given that you decided to be flexible with the structure of the milestones, which I believe makes sense, I reiterate my recommendation that, in light of flexible structures tailored to the applicants, there should be severe consequences for non-compliance.

[Frisson]

I voted FOR this proposal on Tally for the reasons outlined here.

@Frisson

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.

[paulofonseca]

voting For the current onchain proposal because this will help make Stylus a more popular choice for developers.

[mcfly]

We’re voting FOR the Stylus Sprint. It’s a smart move to lure in fresh talent. The milestone-based funding will keep teams on their toes, and having Offchain Labs and OpenZeppelin experts on the evaluation committee is a major plus.

[maxlomu]

Hi, voted in support of the program.
Positioning Arbitrum as the Place to Build requires tools and early adopters of Stylus, which will expand our addressable market for builders.

[quote=“Entropy, post:45, topic:26437”]
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. [/quote]

I’m surprised in the final proposal there were no internal KPIs for the program to determine if it was successful.

• How many people should the program reach out to?
• How many applications should we aim for?
• How many approved projects?

@Entropy - will you be the team accountable for this?

[Tekr0x.eth]

Voted For: Onboarding builders is key to growing the Stylus and overall Arbitrum ecosystem. I think the program is designed well. Also, I believe that the fund (5M ARB) is enough to make a significant impact. I look forward to seeing the results of this program after some time. I would emphasize that the success of this pilot project will be defined by the quality of the projects/builders we onboard, so I wish good luck to all people involved in the projects. I believe they are a very strong team on the project.

[Euphoria]

The following reflects the views of the Lampros Labs DAO governance team, composed of @Blueweb, @Euphoria, and Hirangi Pandya (@Nyx), based on our combined research, analysis, and ideation.

We are voting FOR this proposal.

We believe this is a necessary step for Stylus adoption, as stated in our Snapshot rationale. The idea of an Evaluation Committee made up of Stylus experts is a strong approach, and tying funds to milestones will help ensure they are used effectively.

Rest our overall thoughts remain the same as expressed in our rationale during the Snapshot voting.

@Euphoria

The following reflects the views of the Lampros Labs DAO governance team, composed of @Blueweb, @Euphoria, and @Nyx, based on our combined research, analysis and ideation.

We’re voting FOR this proposal as we believe it’s a necessary step for Stylus adoption.

The idea of having an Evaluation Committee made up of Stylus experts is a good approach. We also agree with giving out funds based on milestones, as this will help prevent misuse.

To make this sprint really successful, we suggest running a strong marketing campaign to attract as many developers as possible. It would be great to showcase the Stylus Sprint at ArbiVerse during Art Museum Token2049 - this could help get more people to apply.

Overall, we think this program can really speed up the adoption of Stylus by creating a set of high-quality projects that show what it can do.

[coinflip]

voting FOR the Stylus Sprint. Targeted investment that will boost adoption of Stylus and encourage protocols to be early adopters that showcase what Stylus can enable is a huge unlock.

I would also encourage the Stylus Sprint Committee to share their findings of gaming protocols leveraging Stylus and drawing it to the attention of GCP to assist in their evaluation for investment and grants. Protocols leveraging and committing to the Arbitrum tech stack and definitely more committed to building and staying in Arbitrum

[Tally_Support]

Onchain voting for this proposal is ending within 24 hours:
[Vote on Tally: Fund the Stylus Sprint](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/eip155:42161:0x789fC99093B09aD01C34DC7251D0C89ce743e5a4/proposal/2433609992754956121)
* * *
I am a bot. Questions? Contact support@tally.xyz

[LevelK]

The LevelK Delegation has cast its onchain vote FOR this proposal. Here is our reasoning:
Arbitrum is a leader in L2 technology and Stylus is part of this advantage. We support this initiative because it promotes not only Stylus but Arbitrum as a place for builders. We also support that overall improvement and advancement of Stylus itself.

[Tane]

We vote FOR the proposal on Tally.

We maintain the support made on Snapshot as below and acknowledge two concerns are appropriately addressed after the Snapshot. We believe Stylus is the key innovation that the Arbitrum ecosystem should push forward and are looking forward to the success of this program.

[RFC] Fund The Stylus Sprint

We vote FOR the proposal on Snapshot. We believe Stylus is an ambitious, yet reasonable innovation that Offchain Labs has developed to make Arbitrum even more attractive to Rust and C++ developers and it’s important to generate momentum of its use within the developer community to have attractive applications and toolings on the Arbitrum ecosystem, thus the program like this is timely, crucial and much needed. We also agree that having an Evaluation Committee is selected by the program manager…

[krst]

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.

[WinVerse]

DAOplomats is voting FOR this proposal on Tally.

The Stylus sprint is a good initiative and we are happy to support its funding just as we did during the temp check.

[Tally_Support]

Voting has ended!
===============
[Fund the Stylus Sprint](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/eip155:42161:0x789fC99093B09aD01C34DC7251D0C89ce743e5a4/proposal/2433609992754956121)

### Final Votes

| **Category**         | **Result**       | **Details**                 |
|----------------------|------------------|-----------------------------|
| **Quorum reached**   | ✅ | 175.60M of 119.31M         |
| **Majority Support** | ✅ |                             |
| **For**              |                  | 154.92M (86.4%)    |
| **Against**          |                  | 3.78M (2.1%) |
| **Abstain**          |                  | 20.68M (11.5%) |

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

[snowdot]

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

See how the community voted and more Arbitrum stats:

# Fund the Stylus Sprint

P.S. I am a human

[SEEDGov]

After consideration, the @SEEDgov delegation has decided to “ABSTAIN” on this proposal at the Tally vote.

Rationale

Considering that we are part of the proposed Evaluation Committee and have economic interests involved, we believe it is ethically correct to abstain from this vote.

[chamadao]

We voted against this proposal, as the deliverables are unclear and costs high. While further technical development in the ecosystem is important, it should be done with clear deliverables and goals.

[olimpio]

For Tally: I voted in favour of this proposal. Same reasoning as for Snapshot, which I also voted positively.

[RFC] Fund The Stylus Sprint

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