Restitution For Extensively Delayed ArbitrumDAO Minigrant Winners
Vote: Against
Type: Snapshot
Although we understand the potential irritation caused by delayed payments, consideration such as reimbursing the given team should be given at the start of the program. It’s well-known that ARB and alike native tokens are volatile, and constantly rebalancing to compensate for price drawdowns is a slippery slope. This setup may work well for other DAOs where there are less moving parts, however, for Arbitrum this is not the case. There are simply too many projects simultaneously taking place, and making an exception to rebalance accounts for this instance is unfavorable. We would encourage proposal creators to specify if the compensation for a certain initiative is denominated in dollars or the native token.
Hackathon Continuation Program
Vote: In favor, no onchain mechanism
Type: Snapshot
We were unable to vote on this due to issues around travel but partook in this discussion from earlier in the month.
The need to follow-on with hackathon winners is key for taking something from a side project and making it into a viable business. This should honestly be a part of the initial proposals to construct grant programs generally. Even in the investing world, doubling down on promising entrepreneurs is a commonplace practice. Not doing so is often leaving money on the table. We do not see a need to initially institute the onchain mechanism.