An Important consideration here is how to avoid the DAO dying and Arbitrum becoming only 4 or so AAEs operating behind closed doors, effectively killing all outside-in innovation.
Some keys to avoid that I see are:
- AAEs should operate with a lot of transparency
- AAEs should work more like orchestrators i.e. open, instead of closed agencies that want to do everything inhouse and behind closed doors. In a way, we could say the DAO-level is too big for small players to interact and propose, but the AAEs should have mechanisms for small players to propose innovations to them and collaborate.
- The DAO should have a strong system to hold AAEs accountable, including more clear mandates/scopes of work (this could evolve based on the SOS objectives and the Calaysts).
Currently, most AAEs don’t have virtually any of the systems for transparency and open-innovation setup. And I don’t know if there’s even a willigness towards decentralisation. This is understandable given the many horror stories of doing decentralisation poorly. However, there are also powerful success stories in Web2, and we could quickly learn from those. The key is having the willigness to keep the DAO alive and even grow it (while increasing execution capacity and focus).