This is basically a summary version of all submissions, although I wouldn’t go as far as to say everyone agrees we should have this as foundation for the conversation. Let’s see what others think.
Regarding Option B, I think Entropy’s submission is the closest thing to a ‘lite’ version that could be executed without involvement from AF & OCL.
Just a quick update on what we discussed during the SOS call last week (SOS Workshop #1):
@krst gave a presentation on why the SOS process was paused and how it will move forward.
A series of workshops led by @krst from L2Beat will follow, which will lead us to the final SOS proposal in-line with the views and wishes from all stakeholders (delegates, projects, AAEs).
To get there, we’ll need to put in some voluntary work and gather input from top Arbitrum projects (dApps/protocols), as well as from people within AAEs who work in areas related to each objective.
@pedrob emphasized that the appropriate way to contact AAE employees is through @krst or OpCo, not directly (to avoid overloading them).
We also agreed that gaming should be included in the final SOS proposal.
The next workshop is scheduled for Thursday at 12:30 PM UTC. We’ll review @MaxLomu’s SOS submission (and possibly @dragonawr’s as well). The goal is to brainstorm what we can realistically do within the scope of that SOS, who we should consult, and what further actions we need to plan.
Thank you very much, @TempeTechie, for the update. I apologize for the insufficient communication on my end. I acknowledge this shortcoming and am working to improve it.
To fill in some gaps already, here is the recording of our last call:
The idea is to take a deeper look at it and figure out what is already happening within the scope of this proposal in the ecosystem. We need to determine who is responsible for what and where the missing pieces are that this strategic objective would address. We also need to learn more about what is within the capacity of the DAO to support, improve, or fill.