Notes on this SOS submission revision
Looking forward to your feedback
I’m looking forward to constructive feedback from everyone in the replies below.
If you think any objective or key result should be changed, please suggest an alternative wording (unless you believe it should be removed entirely).
Merging existing submissions
The title of this SOS matrix currently says {Merged: TBD} because it’s still open for others to join (it’s a combination of objectives and key results from all submissions).
If you’d like to be included in the merged title, please mention it in the replies. Just note that doing so means your original submission will not proceed to the final vote.
Objective 1 (Arbitrum has best-in-class distribution and user acquisition channels)
The content of Objective 1 draws inspiration from SOS objectives proposed by TempeTechie, @MaxLomu, @Gabriel, @Tnorm, and @Entropy, as well as a One-Off submission by Tekr0x.eth.
The idea of having a presence at non-crypto events has long been championed by Krzysztof from L2Beat. Additionally, onboarding people at in-person events was suggested by Patrick McCorry during the Arbitrum Foundation SOS Discussion call.
Objective 2 (Arbitrum is the number one choice for enterprises)
Onboarding institutions was the most commonly suggested objective, proposed by @0xDonPepe & @JuanRah, @Gabriel, @MaxLomu, @Tnorm, @Entropy, @404DAO, and TempeTechie. The content in this proposal draws on their submissions, as well as feedback from other delegates.
Organizing hackathons for enterprises as a marketing and educational tool was proposed by Krzysztof and by @JuanRah during his and @0xDonPepe’s SOS Discussion call.
Objective 3 (Arbitrum is the home of builders and innovation)
The name of this objective comes from @MaxLomu’s SOS proposal.
The content is based on SOS submissions by @404DAO, @MaxLomu, @Gabriel, and @Entropy, along with feedback from builders such as 1a35e1 from Lighthouse Labs (RFP list), CupOJoseph (audit program, angel investors), andreiv (grants, funding), kamilgorski (marketing/engagement support), and Patrick McCorry during the Arbitrum Foundation SOS discussion call (regarding increasing the number of contributors to the Arbitrum core stack).
Objective 4 (DeFi is the core pillar of Arbitrum)
The name of this objective comes from @Gabriel’s SOS proposal.
The content and key results are based on SOS submissions by @Tnorm, @0xDonPepe & @JuanRah, and @Gabriel.
Objective 5 (Arbitrum is a leader in other, non-DeFi, verticals)
This objective was first suggested by DanielO in his SOS One-Off.
Additional verticals were also mentioned in SOS submissions by @Dragonawr (DePIN), @Gabriel (gaming, social, DePIN), @MaxLomu (AI, privacy, DePIN), @0xDonPepe & @JuanRah (supply chain, logistics, enterprise software), and in the SOS One-Off by Tekr0x.eth (social).
Objective 6 (Arbitrum DAO operates with efficiency)
The name of this objective comes from @Entropy’s Objective 1.
The content (including key results, risks, and non-capital resources) is based on SOS submissions by @Entropy, @SEEDGov, and @MaxLomu, as well as the vision post by the Arbitrum Foundation and the surrounding debate.
Objective 7 (ARB token has additional premium and utility)
This objective (giving premium to ARB) was first suggested by @MaxLomu in his SOS submission, with additional ideas contributed by @Tnorm.
Objective 8 (Arbitrum DAO treasury is well managed and has multiple revenue streams)
The content of this objective is based on SOS submissions by @Entropy and @Tnorm, as well as feedback from @ajwarner90 and Steven during their SOS discussion call. The key results are primarily drawn from Entropy’s Objective 2.
How will objectives be executed?
Under the new organizational vision, AAEs will be responsible for most (if not all) of the execution.
Once the final SOS proposal is approved, OpCo will assign objectives to the appropriate AAEs. Delegates will oversee progress toward the key results defined for each objective.
If none of the current AAEs can take on a specific objective (or if an assigned AAE isn’t making any progress) there may be a need to create a new AAE or expand the scope of an existing one (which could include hiring new people).
In some cases, a working group established by the DAO might step in to work on an objective or part of it. Over time, that group could evolve into a new AAE or merge with an existing one.