The below response reflects the views of L2BEATâs governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and itâs based on the combined research, fact-checking, and ideation of the two.
The discussion on whether we should establish an OpCo entity boils down to the question of whether we want Arbitrum DAO to be reactive or proactive.
As it stands, the DAO is currently mostly reactive in the sense that delegates are called to vote on initiatives that are being developed individually by different contributors and do not necessarily co-exist in a coherent, structured way. A good analogy would be a series of unique puzzle pieces being fitted together, without however an end image to guide the process. Each initiative is working to establish its structure with different processes as thereâs a lack of standard practices on that front â and no initiative can create a standard practice without heavily deviating from its original purpose.
This situation creates operational hurdles that burden each proposer separately and also puts a strain on the DAO. From having no standard operational process to distribute money (e.g. we have so many different multi-sigs that each costs money to run) to the inability of the DAO to straight-up hire people to do work, to the lack of standard operational structures and processes, everything points to a need to have an entity responsible for the DAOâs operations.
Simply put, the DAO needs an Operating Company (OpCo).
Even things that have been partially and temporarily resolved, such as the need to procure service providers through the ADPC, or the need to have domain experts review and provide feedback to proposals through the ARDC, would be significantly easier to set up and run under an OpCo.
Having the ability to drive initiatives forward without having to worry about the operational burden of execution will empower contributors to expend all their efforts towards the success of their initiative, and not towards trivial (to their cause) things such as setting up a multisig or figuring out how they should be reporting their progress.
On top of assisting with the operations of ongoing initiatives, through an OpCo, the DAO would have the ability to tackle needs as they arise by hiring the right people and assigning them the appropriate tasks. For example, if thereâs a need for an oversight committee to oversee different initiatives that have been funded by the DAO, the OpCo could hire people and set up a team to carry out that work.
Having said that, while there might be details around the proposed OpCo that still need to be defined, the overall concept of establishing an Operating Company is something that weâre supportive of and believe is very much needed.
Weâd like to help push the OpCo proposal forward in a way that inspires confidence among delegates and with the appropriate checks and balances to ensure that itâs the DAO that ultimately remains in control, without however suffocating the OpCoâs ability to operate.