By Emmanuel Full-stack Developer & Ethereum CAT Contributor | 7+ years experience building dApps LinkedIn GitHub
This proposal outlines the development of a Grant Progress Tracking Dashboard for the Arbitrum Foundation, designed to provide the community with a transparent, user-friendly platform for monitoring the progress of funded proposals. The tracker will offer detailed milestone tracking, real-time updates, and automated alerts for deviations or delays. The goal is to offer unified access to all past and active grants along with their statuses, with a total cost of $3,500.
Currently, tracking the progress of the Arbitrum Foundation's grant proposals is fragmented, with updates scattered across various update posts and channels. This lack of cohesion hinders the community's ability to effectively oversee projects, evaluate progress, and address potential issues promptly.
To overcome these challenges, we propose the development of a Grant Progress Tracker equipped with the following features:
Milestone 1: UI/UX Design & Feedback (1 week) Cost: $500 USD
Milestone 2: Frontend Development (1 week) Cost: $1,000 USD
Milestone 3: Backend Development & Finalization (2 weeks) Cost: $2,000 USD
Total Cost: $3,500 USD
By providing a user-friendly platform for tracking grant progress, this proposal will strengthen accountability within the Arbitrum Foundation community and ensure the successful execution of grant-funded projects.
Update: After some feedback, I have decided that If the Questbook program is successfully renewed, I will apply there, as it appears to be the best fit given the funding amount. Otherwise, I will proceed with the DAO governance approach.
Update: I appreciate all your support for the proposal and your input on the budget constraints. While I kept the initial budget lean to gauge community interest, I’m reevaluating it now to better reflect the project’s features and long-term potential and will update it shortly to allow for more robust features.
By Emmanuel Full-stack Developer & Ethereum CAT Contributor | 7+ years experience building dApps LinkedIn GitHub
This proposal outlines the development of a Grant Progress Tracking Dashboard for the Arbitrum Foundation, designed to provide the community with a transparent, user-friendly platform for monitoring the progress of funded proposals. The tracker will offer detailed milestone tracking, real-time updates, and automated alerts for deviations or delays. The goal is to offer unified access to all past and active grants along with their statuses, with a total cost of $3,500.
Currently, tracking the progress of the Arbitrum Foundation's grant proposals is fragmented, with updates scattered across various update posts and channels. This lack of cohesion hinders the community's ability to effectively oversee projects, evaluate progress, and address potential issues promptly.
To overcome these challenges, we propose the development of a Grant Progress Tracker equipped with the following features:
Milestone 1: UI/UX Design & Feedback (1 week) Cost: $500 USD
Milestone 2: Frontend Development (1 week) Cost: $1,000 USD
Milestone 3: Backend Development & Finalization (2 weeks) Cost: $2,000 USD
Total Cost: $3,500 USD
By providing a user-friendly platform for tracking grant progress, this proposal will strengthen accountability within the Arbitrum Foundation community and ensure the successful execution of grant-funded projects.
Update: After some feedback, I have decided that If the Questbook program is successfully renewed, I will apply there, as it appears to be the best fit given the funding amount. Otherwise, I will proceed with the DAO governance approach.
Update: I appreciate all your support for the proposal and your input on the budget constraints. While I kept the initial budget lean to gauge community interest, I’m reevaluating it now to better reflect the project’s features and long-term potential and will update it shortly to allow for more robust features.
Thank you for sharing the details about Karma GAP! A key part of my updated proposal is the mandatory reporting requirement, which ensures that all grant recipients are consistently updating their progress on a scheduled basis. Something that Karma GAP does not offer.
Thank you for sharing the details about Karma GAP! A key part of my updated proposal is the mandatory reporting requirement, which ensures that all grant recipients are consistently updating their progress on a scheduled basis. Something that Karma GAP does not offer.
Sure, I’m happy to discuss how our efforts could complement each other if that aligns with Arbitrum’s goals. That said, my focus is on delivering a tailored solution based on the specific needs outlined in the proposal discussions, If your platform is open to UI/UX changes, I’d be interested in exploring whether it could be adapted to meet these requirements.
Hey, Paulo alerted me about this thread, so jumping in.
Karma GAP is built to solve this exact problem and we were funded by Arbitrum through Plurality Labs. We have many communities using GAP, so the application is working well and thriving.
Hey, Paulo alerted me about this thread, so jumping in.
Karma GAP is built to solve this exact problem and we were funded by Arbitrum through Plurality Labs. We have many communities using GAP, so the application is working well and thriving.
When we got funded, Feems was super helpful and helped load all the grants across various programs, you can see them all here: https://gap.karmahq.xyz/arbitrum. Many grantees have continued to use it to share milestones and updates.
So, it's not a tech issue anymore, it's a process issue. I have messaged and talked to almost all providers who run grant programs for Arbitrum. Some providers have their own internal systems for tracking it and may be they don't have a reason to use GAP. Grantees will do what the program operators tell them.
We have continued to add more features, impact measurement and many more things to GAP and would really want to make it work for Arbitrum if I can get some help on process or atleast someone to talk to!
I'm happy to find a way to work with you as well @EmmanuelO if you are open to it.
Thank you for sharing the details about Karma GAP! A key part of my updated proposal is the mandatory reporting requirement, which ensures that all grant recipients are consistently updating their progress on a scheduled basis. Something that Karma GAP does not offer.
Thank you for sharing the details about Karma GAP! A key part of my updated proposal is the mandatory reporting requirement, which ensures that all grant recipients are consistently updating their progress on a scheduled basis. Something that Karma GAP does not offer.
Sure, I’m happy to discuss how our efforts could complement each other if that aligns with Arbitrum’s goals. That said, my focus is on delivering a tailored solution based on the specific needs outlined in the proposal discussions, If your platform is open to UI/UX changes, I’d be interested in exploring whether it could be adapted to meet these requirements.
Hey, Paulo alerted me about this thread, so jumping in.
Karma GAP is built to solve this exact problem and we were funded by Arbitrum through Plurality Labs. We have many communities using GAP, so the application is working well and thriving.
Hey, Paulo alerted me about this thread, so jumping in.
Karma GAP is built to solve this exact problem and we were funded by Arbitrum through Plurality Labs. We have many communities using GAP, so the application is working well and thriving.
When we got funded, Feems was super helpful and helped load all the grants across various programs, you can see them all here: https://gap.karmahq.xyz/arbitrum. Many grantees have continued to use it to share milestones and updates.
So, it's not a tech issue anymore, it's a process issue. I have messaged and talked to almost all providers who run grant programs for Arbitrum. Some providers have their own internal systems for tracking it and may be they don't have a reason to use GAP. Grantees will do what the program operators tell them.
We have continued to add more features, impact measurement and many more things to GAP and would really want to make it work for Arbitrum if I can get some help on process or atleast someone to talk to!
I'm happy to find a way to work with you as well @EmmanuelO if you are open to it.
Thank you for clarifying and sharing your perspective. I may have misunderstood your earlier comment as a critique of my experience, and I apologize if that wasn’t your intent.
I hope we can work together to address these issues collaboratively as a community, and I welcome any further thoughts you might have. Thanks again for your input.
Thank you for sharing your input—I genuinely appreciate your perspective. That said, I wanted to clarify that, so far, the majority of feedback has been supportive, and many people recognize the need for this initiative. I feel strongly that this proposal addresses a critical gap within the DAO.
I’m an active participant in DAOs and have been deeply involved in discussions and collaborations within this space. My professional experience and understanding of decentralized systems are well-documented, including on platforms like LinkedIn. To be candid, I do feel that implying otherwise might overlook the context and research I’ve already contributed.
Thank you for sharing your input—I genuinely appreciate your perspective. That said, I wanted to clarify that, so far, the majority of feedback has been supportive, and many people recognize the need for this initiative. I feel strongly that this proposal addresses a critical gap within the DAO.
I’m an active participant in DAOs and have been deeply involved in discussions and collaborations within this space. My professional experience and understanding of decentralized systems are well-documented, including on platforms like LinkedIn. To be candid, I do feel that implying otherwise might overlook the context and research I’ve already contributed.
If there is a conflict of intrest for you with KarmaGAP, I have stated my intention is not to discard what has been done.
Nonetheless, I respect your concerns and welcome the opportunity to engage in further dialogue. If there are specific areas you think could strengthen the proposal, I’d be glad to hear your thoughts.
...and I want to clarify that my proposal is specifically designed to address the platform usage challenges, which others have also recognized as an issue. My experience in the DAO space is well-documented, and I came into this proposal leveraging my resume and extensive work in decentralized ecosystems over the past seven years.
It’s entirely normal for proposals to evolve based on feedback, and I welcome constructive suggestions. However, I found the suggestion that I need a mentor for an industry where I have been an active participant and leader to be unexpected. I’m curious if this was meant to encourage collaboration or reflect a concern about a specific aspect of my proposal.
...and I want to clarify that my proposal is specifically designed to address the platform usage challenges, which others have also recognized as an issue. My experience in the DAO space is well-documented, and I came into this proposal leveraging my resume and extensive work in decentralized ecosystems over the past seven years.
It’s entirely normal for proposals to evolve based on feedback, and I welcome constructive suggestions. However, I found the suggestion that I need a mentor for an industry where I have been an active participant and leader to be unexpected. I’m curious if this was meant to encourage collaboration or reflect a concern about a specific aspect of my proposal.
Could you please clarify your intentions here? I want to ensure we’re aligned and working towards the best outcomes for the DAO.
We can offer an API for the progress of the Arbitrum programs be tracked, to be fair it is already inherently being built in our platform now with deadlines and reminders. We are working with the OSO team where we provide our APIs for them to access.
You guys are doing good work. The mandatory aspect is what’s currently missing, which is likely why the platform isn’t being fully utilized. With some UI adjustments and an expansion of the data collection criteria, it could serve as a solid foundation.
Hi, thanks for your response! I had already posted the proposal here and on a couple of other forums to gather feedback. My goal is to continue refining the proposal based on community input, as this is a tool built for the DAO, and it wouldn’t make sense to develop it without the DAO's involvement.
Since then, the proposal has evolved. From the previous discussions, it’s clear the community wants a more robust platform, so there is going to be a budget change/increase.
Hi, thanks for your response! I had already posted the proposal here and on a couple of other forums to gather feedback. My goal is to continue refining the proposal based on community input, as this is a tool built for the DAO, and it wouldn’t make sense to develop it without the DAO's involvement.
Since then, the proposal has evolved. From the previous discussions, it’s clear the community wants a more robust platform, so there is going to be a budget change/increase.
Another significant change has been the inclusion of mandatory reporting. While I will be going through Questbook for funding, I believe a DAO-level mandate might be necessary to ensure all grant recipients provide the regular updates necessary to the platform. I’d love to hear your thoughts on this.
The data around milestones will be collected through a combination of automated and manual processes to ensure accuracy, reliability, and efficiency.
The updated proposal I’m working on will also detail the maintenance of the platform for 12 months, as requested by the community.
Thank you for clarifying and sharing your perspective. I may have misunderstood your earlier comment as a critique of my experience, and I apologize if that wasn’t your intent.
I hope we can work together to address these issues collaboratively as a community, and I welcome any further thoughts you might have. Thanks again for your input.
Thank you for sharing your input—I genuinely appreciate your perspective. That said, I wanted to clarify that, so far, the majority of feedback has been supportive, and many people recognize the need for this initiative. I feel strongly that this proposal addresses a critical gap within the DAO.
I’m an active participant in DAOs and have been deeply involved in discussions and collaborations within this space. My professional experience and understanding of decentralized systems are well-documented, including on platforms like LinkedIn. To be candid, I do feel that implying otherwise might overlook the context and research I’ve already contributed.
Thank you for sharing your input—I genuinely appreciate your perspective. That said, I wanted to clarify that, so far, the majority of feedback has been supportive, and many people recognize the need for this initiative. I feel strongly that this proposal addresses a critical gap within the DAO.
I’m an active participant in DAOs and have been deeply involved in discussions and collaborations within this space. My professional experience and understanding of decentralized systems are well-documented, including on platforms like LinkedIn. To be candid, I do feel that implying otherwise might overlook the context and research I’ve already contributed.
If there is a conflict of intrest for you with KarmaGAP, I have stated my intention is not to discard what has been done.
Nonetheless, I respect your concerns and welcome the opportunity to engage in further dialogue. If there are specific areas you think could strengthen the proposal, I’d be glad to hear your thoughts.
...and I want to clarify that my proposal is specifically designed to address the platform usage challenges, which others have also recognized as an issue. My experience in the DAO space is well-documented, and I came into this proposal leveraging my resume and extensive work in decentralized ecosystems over the past seven years.
It’s entirely normal for proposals to evolve based on feedback, and I welcome constructive suggestions. However, I found the suggestion that I need a mentor for an industry where I have been an active participant and leader to be unexpected. I’m curious if this was meant to encourage collaboration or reflect a concern about a specific aspect of my proposal.
...and I want to clarify that my proposal is specifically designed to address the platform usage challenges, which others have also recognized as an issue. My experience in the DAO space is well-documented, and I came into this proposal leveraging my resume and extensive work in decentralized ecosystems over the past seven years.
It’s entirely normal for proposals to evolve based on feedback, and I welcome constructive suggestions. However, I found the suggestion that I need a mentor for an industry where I have been an active participant and leader to be unexpected. I’m curious if this was meant to encourage collaboration or reflect a concern about a specific aspect of my proposal.
Could you please clarify your intentions here? I want to ensure we’re aligned and working towards the best outcomes for the DAO.
We can offer an API for the progress of the Arbitrum programs be tracked, to be fair it is already inherently being built in our platform now with deadlines and reminders. We are working with the OSO team where we provide our APIs for them to access.
You guys are doing good work. The mandatory aspect is what’s currently missing, which is likely why the platform isn’t being fully utilized. With some UI adjustments and an expansion of the data collection criteria, it could serve as a solid foundation.
Hi, thanks for your response! I had already posted the proposal here and on a couple of other forums to gather feedback. My goal is to continue refining the proposal based on community input, as this is a tool built for the DAO, and it wouldn’t make sense to develop it without the DAO's involvement.
Since then, the proposal has evolved. From the previous discussions, it’s clear the community wants a more robust platform, so there is going to be a budget change/increase.
Hi, thanks for your response! I had already posted the proposal here and on a couple of other forums to gather feedback. My goal is to continue refining the proposal based on community input, as this is a tool built for the DAO, and it wouldn’t make sense to develop it without the DAO's involvement.
Since then, the proposal has evolved. From the previous discussions, it’s clear the community wants a more robust platform, so there is going to be a budget change/increase.
Another significant change has been the inclusion of mandatory reporting. While I will be going through Questbook for funding, I believe a DAO-level mandate might be necessary to ensure all grant recipients provide the regular updates necessary to the platform. I’d love to hear your thoughts on this.
The data around milestones will be collected through a combination of automated and manual processes to ensure accuracy, reliability, and efficiency.
The updated proposal I’m working on will also detail the maintenance of the platform for 12 months, as requested by the community.
Thanks for your questions! I updated the original proposal yesterday to state that I’m working on a new version, which I’ll post in a few days to address most of your concerns. In the meantime, feel free to ask any other questions you may have. To quickly address some of your points: the key incentive in my proposal is to make it mandatory for grant recipients to report progress regularly to continue receiving funding. While I have no issue with using KarmaGAP, I envision a more streamlined and intuitive UI/UX tailored to this proposal. I believe gathering more community-specific feedback could help refine the platform further. For example, I’d like to see not just the grants but also the individual projects within those grants. I want to understand how the deliverables for each milestone connect to the overall project. Essentially, I want to grasp the “why” behind each milestone in less than two minutes. I can see some details on it and some other similar platforms but I don't always get the full picture. That said, I’ve reached out to the KarmaGAP team to explore potential collaboration on this. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts!
Good questions, from my research they seem to offer public APIs for this but we are waiting for them to confirm.
Thanks for your questions! I updated the original proposal yesterday to state that I’m working on a new version, which I’ll post in a few days to address most of your concerns. In the meantime, feel free to ask any other questions you may have. To quickly address some of your points: the key incentive in my proposal is to make it mandatory for grant recipients to report progress regularly to continue receiving funding. While I have no issue with using KarmaGAP, I envision a more streamlined and intuitive UI/UX tailored to this proposal. I believe gathering more community-specific feedback could help refine the platform further. For example, I’d like to see not just the grants but also the individual projects within those grants. I want to understand how the deliverables for each milestone connect to the overall project. Essentially, I want to grasp the “why” behind each milestone in less than two minutes. I can see some details on it and some other similar platforms but I don't always get the full picture. That said, I’ve reached out to the KarmaGAP team to explore potential collaboration on this. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts!
Good questions, from my research they seem to offer public APIs for this but we are waiting for them to confirm.
Sure, I’m happy to discuss how our efforts could complement each other if that aligns with Arbitrum's goals. That said, my focus is on delivering a tailored solution based on the specific needs outlined in the proposal discussions, If your platform is open to UI/UX changes, I’d be interested in exploring whether it could be adapted to meet these requirements.
Thank you for sharing the details about Karma GAP! A key part of my updated proposal is the mandatory reporting requirement, which ensures that all grant recipients are consistently updating their progress on a scheduled basis. Something that Karma GAP does not offer. If they are open to some UI/UX change I could use the platform to achieve this goal.
Thank you for your support of the idea! I appreciate your feedback and the points you’ve raised. This ensures that the project doesn’t duplicate efforts, but rather complements these existing initiatives. The activities of such a project that you mentioned would be tracked by this, as a constant external auditor. I agree that ongoing support and maintenance are critical aspects. I'm revising the budget to include estimates for the long-term costs of maintaining the platform. Correct, there has been a lot of valuable feedback so far, and I’m in the process of updating the proposal to reflect these changes. I truly appreciate your continued input and will ensure that it is all taken into account in the revised version.
Hi, thank you for your thoughtful feedback! I appreciate your support and the insightful questions you’ve raised.
Hi, thank you for your thoughtful feedback! I appreciate your support and the insightful questions you’ve raised.
I am writing up a new budget to accommodate all the feedback received so far, including the cost for platform maintenance across 12 months. Thanks again, I truly appreciate CastleCapital’s support.
Thank you for the thoughtful feedback! I’m glad to see that you resonate with the importance of a standardized tracking system. Your suggestion of evolving the tool into a data feeder for a performance system, like a Balanced Scorecard, is fascinating. I’ll explore how this could be implemented in the tool’s roadmap, especially for tracking KPIs like engagement, funding efficiency, and impact.
If the OpCo proposal is approved, integrating this system for operations monitoring is an excellent idea. It would be a natural extension of the tool’s purpose. I also appreciate your input on the budget constraints. While I kept the initial budget lean to gauge community interest, I’m reevaluating it now to better reflect the project's features and long-term potential and will update it shortly.
Hi Gabriel. Thank you for the insightful feedback! I'm glad you agree with the Questbook path. Yes, I will be revising the budget to allow for a more robust build. Regarding the annual costs, running the platform will indeed incur ongoing expenses, particularly related to hosting, API integrations, and regular maintenance (including server patching, third-party service monitoring, and bug fixes), the cost for this will be reflected in the new budget. I also appreciate your suggestion about engaging with stakeholders to understand which information is most relevant for the platform. I’ll take this into account. Thanks again for the feedback and for pushing the proposal forward! I'm excited to keep refining it and make it a valuable tool for everyone.
Hi, thanks for the suggestion I’m fully on board with this idea and would love to collaborate with the team to explore how we can implement the tracking features directly into the platform.
Hey, thank you for the feedback! I agree that relying on just one person for development can introduce risks, especially long-term. That’s why I’m open to exploring collaborations or partnerships as the project progresses. The goal isn’t to build a standalone tool and walk away but to create something scalable, adaptable, and integrated with the community’s evolving needs. Additional funding would make this easier, especially for data collection, testing, and long-term maintenance.
This tool isn’t meant to replace all human oversight but to streamline it by improving tracking and visibility across the entire grant landscape with less manual effort. You’re right: if a project truly values funding, it will likely stay on top of its milestones. This tool adds clarity and oversight. Following a suggestion I’ll add to the proposal to make reporting progress through the platform mandatory.
Hey, thank you for the feedback! I agree that relying on just one person for development can introduce risks, especially long-term. That’s why I’m open to exploring collaborations or partnerships as the project progresses. The goal isn’t to build a standalone tool and walk away but to create something scalable, adaptable, and integrated with the community’s evolving needs. Additional funding would make this easier, especially for data collection, testing, and long-term maintenance.
This tool isn’t meant to replace all human oversight but to streamline it by improving tracking and visibility across the entire grant landscape with less manual effort. You’re right: if a project truly values funding, it will likely stay on top of its milestones. This tool adds clarity and oversight. Following a suggestion I’ll add to the proposal to make reporting progress through the platform mandatory.
Thanks again for sharing your thoughts! Feedback like this is invaluable and ensures the proposal aligns with community needs.
Thank you for the thoughtful feedback and for taking the time to dig into this.
You’re right that the initial budget is small for the scope of development. My initial plan was to keep the scope lean, as this was meant to gauge the DAO's interest in the concept. The original goal was to create an interface for grant recipients to update their milestones, with the platform sending notifications. with notifications sent to users (via email, in-app alerts, Discord, or Telegram) for updates or missed deadlines.
Thank you for the thoughtful feedback and for taking the time to dig into this.
You’re right that the initial budget is small for the scope of development. My initial plan was to keep the scope lean, as this was meant to gauge the DAO's interest in the concept. The original goal was to create an interface for grant recipients to update their milestones, with the platform sending notifications. with notifications sent to users (via email, in-app alerts, Discord, or Telegram) for updates or missed deadlines.
However, based on the feedback and interest from the community, I’m expanding the scope and adjusting the budget to better align with the desired features and technical requirements. To elaborate on how the core features will function I will implement webhooks to monitor APIs like Questbook, Discord, Twitter, etc., to catch real-time events as they happen, for events without real-time API support, I will use periodic polling as a fallback.
The notification system will work by events triggered for example Discord data will be normalized through webhook events, and Firebase will manage the notification states to ensure consistency. I will also use WebSockets to broadcast real-time updates across all connected front-end users.
You brought up another valid point about long-term maintenance. The tool will definitely need some post-launch upkeep. I’m considering introducing a monthly maintenance retainer to ensure it stays functional and receives updates. I would like to hear the community's thoughts on what they think is reasonable in terms of the retainer. It would cover the cost of bug fixing, monitoring third-party API disruptions, server patching, uptime monitoring, following up on users who miss milestone updates, etc.
Ezreal brought up another excellent suggestion: requiring grant recipients to report their progress to me through the platform. This would make tracking milestones even easier and more accurate while adding a layer of accountability. If Questbook is renewed, this platform will integrate easily with their API. However, if it isn’t renewed, the tool will still function fully as a standalone solution.
Haha, I don’t mind the questions at all. Thanks for the encouragement! It means a lot. I’m committed to creating tools that truly add value to the community, and your input helps me refine this vision. Let’s keep building together :metal:
Sure, I’m happy to discuss how our efforts could complement each other if that aligns with Arbitrum's goals. That said, my focus is on delivering a tailored solution based on the specific needs outlined in the proposal discussions, If your platform is open to UI/UX changes, I’d be interested in exploring whether it could be adapted to meet these requirements.
Thank you for sharing the details about Karma GAP! A key part of my updated proposal is the mandatory reporting requirement, which ensures that all grant recipients are consistently updating their progress on a scheduled basis. Something that Karma GAP does not offer. If they are open to some UI/UX change I could use the platform to achieve this goal.
Thank you for your support of the idea! I appreciate your feedback and the points you’ve raised. This ensures that the project doesn’t duplicate efforts, but rather complements these existing initiatives. The activities of such a project that you mentioned would be tracked by this, as a constant external auditor. I agree that ongoing support and maintenance are critical aspects. I'm revising the budget to include estimates for the long-term costs of maintaining the platform. Correct, there has been a lot of valuable feedback so far, and I’m in the process of updating the proposal to reflect these changes. I truly appreciate your continued input and will ensure that it is all taken into account in the revised version.
Hi, thank you for your thoughtful feedback! I appreciate your support and the insightful questions you’ve raised.
Hi, thank you for your thoughtful feedback! I appreciate your support and the insightful questions you’ve raised.
I am writing up a new budget to accommodate all the feedback received so far, including the cost for platform maintenance across 12 months. Thanks again, I truly appreciate CastleCapital’s support.
Thank you for the thoughtful feedback! I’m glad to see that you resonate with the importance of a standardized tracking system. Your suggestion of evolving the tool into a data feeder for a performance system, like a Balanced Scorecard, is fascinating. I’ll explore how this could be implemented in the tool’s roadmap, especially for tracking KPIs like engagement, funding efficiency, and impact.
If the OpCo proposal is approved, integrating this system for operations monitoring is an excellent idea. It would be a natural extension of the tool’s purpose. I also appreciate your input on the budget constraints. While I kept the initial budget lean to gauge community interest, I’m reevaluating it now to better reflect the project's features and long-term potential and will update it shortly.
Hi Gabriel. Thank you for the insightful feedback! I'm glad you agree with the Questbook path. Yes, I will be revising the budget to allow for a more robust build. Regarding the annual costs, running the platform will indeed incur ongoing expenses, particularly related to hosting, API integrations, and regular maintenance (including server patching, third-party service monitoring, and bug fixes), the cost for this will be reflected in the new budget. I also appreciate your suggestion about engaging with stakeholders to understand which information is most relevant for the platform. I’ll take this into account. Thanks again for the feedback and for pushing the proposal forward! I'm excited to keep refining it and make it a valuable tool for everyone.
Hi, thanks for the suggestion I’m fully on board with this idea and would love to collaborate with the team to explore how we can implement the tracking features directly into the platform.
Hey, thank you for the feedback! I agree that relying on just one person for development can introduce risks, especially long-term. That’s why I’m open to exploring collaborations or partnerships as the project progresses. The goal isn’t to build a standalone tool and walk away but to create something scalable, adaptable, and integrated with the community’s evolving needs. Additional funding would make this easier, especially for data collection, testing, and long-term maintenance.
This tool isn’t meant to replace all human oversight but to streamline it by improving tracking and visibility across the entire grant landscape with less manual effort. You’re right: if a project truly values funding, it will likely stay on top of its milestones. This tool adds clarity and oversight. Following a suggestion I’ll add to the proposal to make reporting progress through the platform mandatory.
Hey, thank you for the feedback! I agree that relying on just one person for development can introduce risks, especially long-term. That’s why I’m open to exploring collaborations or partnerships as the project progresses. The goal isn’t to build a standalone tool and walk away but to create something scalable, adaptable, and integrated with the community’s evolving needs. Additional funding would make this easier, especially for data collection, testing, and long-term maintenance.
This tool isn’t meant to replace all human oversight but to streamline it by improving tracking and visibility across the entire grant landscape with less manual effort. You’re right: if a project truly values funding, it will likely stay on top of its milestones. This tool adds clarity and oversight. Following a suggestion I’ll add to the proposal to make reporting progress through the platform mandatory.
Thanks again for sharing your thoughts! Feedback like this is invaluable and ensures the proposal aligns with community needs.
Thank you for the thoughtful feedback and for taking the time to dig into this.
You’re right that the initial budget is small for the scope of development. My initial plan was to keep the scope lean, as this was meant to gauge the DAO's interest in the concept. The original goal was to create an interface for grant recipients to update their milestones, with the platform sending notifications. with notifications sent to users (via email, in-app alerts, Discord, or Telegram) for updates or missed deadlines.
Thank you for the thoughtful feedback and for taking the time to dig into this.
You’re right that the initial budget is small for the scope of development. My initial plan was to keep the scope lean, as this was meant to gauge the DAO's interest in the concept. The original goal was to create an interface for grant recipients to update their milestones, with the platform sending notifications. with notifications sent to users (via email, in-app alerts, Discord, or Telegram) for updates or missed deadlines.
However, based on the feedback and interest from the community, I’m expanding the scope and adjusting the budget to better align with the desired features and technical requirements. To elaborate on how the core features will function I will implement webhooks to monitor APIs like Questbook, Discord, Twitter, etc., to catch real-time events as they happen, for events without real-time API support, I will use periodic polling as a fallback.
The notification system will work by events triggered for example Discord data will be normalized through webhook events, and Firebase will manage the notification states to ensure consistency. I will also use WebSockets to broadcast real-time updates across all connected front-end users.
You brought up another valid point about long-term maintenance. The tool will definitely need some post-launch upkeep. I’m considering introducing a monthly maintenance retainer to ensure it stays functional and receives updates. I would like to hear the community's thoughts on what they think is reasonable in terms of the retainer. It would cover the cost of bug fixing, monitoring third-party API disruptions, server patching, uptime monitoring, following up on users who miss milestone updates, etc.
Ezreal brought up another excellent suggestion: requiring grant recipients to report their progress to me through the platform. This would make tracking milestones even easier and more accurate while adding a layer of accountability. If Questbook is renewed, this platform will integrate easily with their API. However, if it isn’t renewed, the tool will still function fully as a standalone solution.
Haha, I don’t mind the questions at all. Thanks for the encouragement! It means a lot. I’m committed to creating tools that truly add value to the community, and your input helps me refine this vision. Let’s keep building together :metal:
Hi Argonaut, Thank you for your support and thoughtful questions!
Thanks for the feedback. The goal is to streamline this process as much as possible by establishing an easy-to-use update dashboard and clear reporting workflows, while also leveraging automated alerts for deviations or delays.
Hi Blueweb. Thank you for your kind feedback and encouragement. I appreciate you recognizing the proposal's alignment with the needs of the DAO. As someone who has been an active participant in a number of decentralized ecosystems, the proposal was born out of a need that I have when trying to understand a new DAO/Foundation.
It’s great to hear that you and Lampros DAO are open to supporting this initiative. I’ll keep you updated on the progress with Questbook and would be thrilled to explore opportunities with you if needed.
Hi James. Thank you for the question. Agreed, I will be pursuing the Questbook route.
The progress updates and milestones will rely on manual submissions from grant recipients. The grant owners set the delivery date and terms, and if those aren’t met, automated alerts for deviations or delays will be triggered.
Hi James. Thank you for the question. Agreed, I will be pursuing the Questbook route.
The progress updates and milestones will rely on manual submissions from grant recipients. The grant owners set the delivery date and terms, and if those aren’t met, automated alerts for deviations or delays will be triggered.
If we wanted to automate aggregation, I could use modular integrations to pull data from different sources like Discord, GitHub, governance forums, etc. However, that would increase the scope of the project and require resources to ensure accuracy and compatibility across platforms. Let me know your thoughts on this.
Thanks for the feedback. I’ll wait and look forward to the Questbook program getting funded so I can proceed with that, as it seems like the best platform given the amount involved. If not, I can move forward with the DAO governance path instead.
Thank you for clarifying! Are you referring to Arbitrum Stylus Sprint for Season 2? From my understanding, this proposal might not fall within its scope, but I'm open to exploring it if it does. As far as I know, Season 3 is currently in the middle of a temperature check
Thank you for your suggestion. I've broken down the project into milestones to mitigate risk. If the proposal is approved, I am open to structuring the first milestone as an MVP and only getting paid after it’s completed.
This approach allows me to deliver a prototype early on and also provides an opportunity to gather valuable feedback. Given the relatively small amount being requested, I believe this is a fair approach. I'm open to exploring alternative approaches to this proposal to find the best solution for everyone.
Yes, I considered that. As far as I know, the funds have run out and it is currently pending additional funding. If it were funded, I would be very interested in pursuing that channel.
All grants receiving funding from the DAO.
Hi Argonaut, Thank you for your support and thoughtful questions!
Thanks for the feedback. The goal is to streamline this process as much as possible by establishing an easy-to-use update dashboard and clear reporting workflows, while also leveraging automated alerts for deviations or delays.
Hi Blueweb. Thank you for your kind feedback and encouragement. I appreciate you recognizing the proposal's alignment with the needs of the DAO. As someone who has been an active participant in a number of decentralized ecosystems, the proposal was born out of a need that I have when trying to understand a new DAO/Foundation.
It’s great to hear that you and Lampros DAO are open to supporting this initiative. I’ll keep you updated on the progress with Questbook and would be thrilled to explore opportunities with you if needed.
Hi James. Thank you for the question. Agreed, I will be pursuing the Questbook route.
The progress updates and milestones will rely on manual submissions from grant recipients. The grant owners set the delivery date and terms, and if those aren’t met, automated alerts for deviations or delays will be triggered.
Hi James. Thank you for the question. Agreed, I will be pursuing the Questbook route.
The progress updates and milestones will rely on manual submissions from grant recipients. The grant owners set the delivery date and terms, and if those aren’t met, automated alerts for deviations or delays will be triggered.
If we wanted to automate aggregation, I could use modular integrations to pull data from different sources like Discord, GitHub, governance forums, etc. However, that would increase the scope of the project and require resources to ensure accuracy and compatibility across platforms. Let me know your thoughts on this.
Thanks for the feedback. I’ll wait and look forward to the Questbook program getting funded so I can proceed with that, as it seems like the best platform given the amount involved. If not, I can move forward with the DAO governance path instead.
Thank you for clarifying! Are you referring to Arbitrum Stylus Sprint for Season 2? From my understanding, this proposal might not fall within its scope, but I'm open to exploring it if it does. As far as I know, Season 3 is currently in the middle of a temperature check
Thank you for your suggestion. I've broken down the project into milestones to mitigate risk. If the proposal is approved, I am open to structuring the first milestone as an MVP and only getting paid after it’s completed.
This approach allows me to deliver a prototype early on and also provides an opportunity to gather valuable feedback. Given the relatively small amount being requested, I believe this is a fair approach. I'm open to exploring alternative approaches to this proposal to find the best solution for everyone.
Yes, I considered that. As far as I know, the funds have run out and it is currently pending additional funding. If it were funded, I would be very interested in pursuing that channel.
All grants receiving funding from the DAO.
We received a similar proposal on the GMX governance forum with a request for $3,000, and we directed them to apply here. Now that the Questbook proposal has passed on Snapshot, it would be ideal to apply for a grant there or approach the foundation for funding, given the small grant size. However, I have a few concerns:
I actually find Karma GAP to be poor at addressing the issue it's meant to address. I don't derive any benefit nor have any financial interest in them. And I have no specific intentions with the comment. It was genuinely meant to help you based of course on the limited context I have.
@EmmanuelO to be direct, I'm very unconvinced by the proposal as it stands and I doubt it would gather any significant support:
@EmmanuelO to be direct, I'm very unconvinced by the proposal as it stands and I doubt it would gather any significant support:
My suggestion is to participate more in the DAO, join the regular calls for a month or two, and get a better sense of where things are at. I also invite you to find a mentor who has built something that a DAO is using and ask them what it took to get there and provide you some guidance.
I'm sorry to be negative but I'm hoping this will save you time and effort. This is of course just my opinion. Best of luck whichever path you decide to take!
We received a similar proposal on the GMX governance forum with a request for $3,000, and we directed them to apply here. Now that the Questbook proposal has passed on Snapshot, it would be ideal to apply for a grant there or approach the foundation for funding, given the small grant size. However, I have a few concerns:
I actually find Karma GAP to be poor at addressing the issue it's meant to address. I don't derive any benefit nor have any financial interest in them. And I have no specific intentions with the comment. It was genuinely meant to help you based of course on the limited context I have.
@EmmanuelO to be direct, I'm very unconvinced by the proposal as it stands and I doubt it would gather any significant support:
@EmmanuelO to be direct, I'm very unconvinced by the proposal as it stands and I doubt it would gather any significant support:
My suggestion is to participate more in the DAO, join the regular calls for a month or two, and get a better sense of where things are at. I also invite you to find a mentor who has built something that a DAO is using and ask them what it took to get there and provide you some guidance.
I'm sorry to be negative but I'm hoping this will save you time and effort. This is of course just my opinion. Best of luck whichever path you decide to take!
Hey @Srijith-Questbook what's Questbook's policy for having the grants data composable for other apps to use? Is the grants data on the Arbitrum Questbook tracks put onchain somehow? Or is there a Questbook API that Karma GAP and others could integrate with, to be able to display that data and have it up to date?
Same thing for all the other grant platforms other than Questbook, that Arbitrum is/will be using. cc/ @DisruptionJoe
Isn't Karma GAP supposed to do this?
I don't see Karma functioning well but important to understand why so this doesn't end the same way
The idea itself is good. However, there are many parallel projects that should partially fulfill this task.
Hi. It seems to us that this proposal leans more towards the Questbook model, but we don’t want to miss the opportunity to raise a few questions and ideas:
open to exploring collaborations or partnerships as the project progresses
Hi. It seems to us that this proposal leans more towards the Questbook model, but we don’t want to miss the opportunity to raise a few questions and ideas:
open to exploring collaborations or partnerships as the project progresses
The goal isn’t to build a standalone tool and walk away but to create something scalable, adaptable, and integrated with the community’s evolving needs.
This is a solid approach, but it could be further strengthened by specifying how you plan to structure these collaborations. Are you considering bringing on additional technical team members from the outset or in later phases? Detailing this would provide confidence in the long-term sustainability of the project.
I’m considering introducing a monthly maintenance retainer to ensure it stays functional and receives updates. I would like to hear the community’s thoughts on what they think is reasonable in terms of the retainer. It would cover the cost of bug fixing, monitoring third-party API disruptions, server patching, uptime monitoring, following up on users who miss milestone updates, etc.
This is an excellent idea, but it might help to define an initial cost range for this retainer. For example, are you considering a percentage of the initial budget or a fixed figure?
You explained that you are "expanding the scope and adjusting the budget to better align with the desired features and technical requirements" and plan to use technologies such as "webhooks to monitor APIs like Questbook, Discord, Twitter, etc." and "WebSockets to broadcast real-time updates." While this expansion adds valuable functionality, it also increases technical complexity. It might be helpful to detail how you will prioritize the initial features to ensure the MVP is functional before implementing the full scope. Do you plan to iterate on the MVP based on early feedback before moving forward?
This tool isn’t meant to replace all human oversight but to streamline it
The tool’s goal is clear, but examples of the practical impact would make the proposal more compelling. For instance, how much manual effort do you expect this tool to save, or how will it specifically improve the experience for grant recipients and the community?
When we got funded, Feems was super helpful and helped load all the grants across various programs, you can see them all here: Karma GAP - Arbitrum community grants. Many grantees have continued to use it to share milestones and updates.
So, it’s not a tech issue anymore, it’s a process issue. I have messaged and talked to almost all providers who run grant programs for Arbitrum. Some providers have their own internal systems for tracking it and may be they don’t have a reason to use GAP. Grantees will do what the program operators tell them.
We have continued to add more features, impact measurement and many more things to GAP and would really want to make it work for Arbitrum if I can get some help on process or atleast someone to talk to!
I’m happy to find a way to work with you as well @EmmanuelO if you are open to it.
From our perspective, GAP appears to be a solid tool that addresses the technical challenges well, so the issue doesn’t seem to lie in its design or functionality. Instead, the real hurdle seems to be the human coordination needed to ensure all grant programs actively use it. This isn’t a problem that can be solved by simply improving the platform; it’s about creating alignment among operators and grantees. To tackle this, it might be worth exploring ways to motivate operators and grantees to engage with the platform consistently. These are just initial thoughts, but it could be something like introduce reputational incentives, where those who diligently maintain and update their milestones or enforce compliance are rewarded with recognition or other benefits. Alternatively (or perhaps in addition) having a dedicated facilitator or team to manage onboarding and act as a bridge between program operators and grantees could also help. This team could oversee compliance, answer questions, and ensure smooth communication, which might lower barriers for adoption and make the process more seamless for everyone.
Im glad you decided to go through the Questbook path, which I believe is the right choice.
I would like to add that, in my opinion, the budget seems too small to develop a truly robust platform. It might be a good idea to request additional funds when applying for the grant, in case further resources are needed down the line.
Im glad you decided to go through the Questbook path, which I believe is the right choice.
I would like to add that, in my opinion, the budget seems too small to develop a truly robust platform. It might be a good idea to request additional funds when applying for the grant, in case further resources are needed down the line.
I also think it's fantastic that we have a system in place to track each grant awarded and monitor how the corresponding milestones were achieved. This transparency ensures accountability and allows for a clear assessment of progress.
Also could you please explain if running the platform in the future will have anual costs and what would they be???
Also i would suggest you work with some of grant stakeholders like DA to know what is the most relevant infomation needed in a platform like this.
The total budget of $3,500 seems a bit tight, especially the $2,000 allocated for backend development. Will the implementation of features like real-time updates and automated alerts be limited? It’s recommended to elaborate more on the technical details, especially how these features will be achieved within this budget.
Additionally, will the tracker require long-term maintenance after it goes live? If so, what is the plan and budget for maintenance to avoid the tool being abandoned due to a lack of follow-up?
We like the proposal and agree with the benefits. We have a few questions:
Will you only be responsible for the creation of the platform, or will you also be involved in gathering all the initial data from the current grants?
What framework will you use to develop the platform?
Very interesting but is this really possible with one person tracking down every grant? I mean you would have to talk to a dozen of people.
I really do hope this will end in a great overview but im not sure.
Hey,
Thanks for a proposal that seems to be addressing the needs of the DAO.
Hey,
Thanks for a proposal that seems to be addressing the needs of the DAO.
By reading this update, I am sure you will be getting success at Questbook & if it doesn't we at Lampros DAO will be happy to help you as the work sounds interesting to us and we will be happy to help you secure the required funding.
Best luck.
Hello! Thanks for your proposal!
How do you plan to retrieve the information from the different platforms used (Questbook, powerhouse, onchain data, etc)?
While I think this is something deeply needed, I do share the opinion that you could get the funding more easily and faster from Questbook szn 3
Yes, I considered that. As far as I know, the funds have run out and it is currently pending additional funding. If it were funded, I would be very interested in pursuing that channel.
Seems the season 2 is still running and with enough funds.
This is a needed tool to ensure better visibility of ongoing DAO-funded projects. A system or hub for progress tracking will help the community see what is being done and where projects stand.
Right now, milestones are being tracked but there is no standardized framework across projects, the DAO should consider this to improve consistency. This helps with project’s flexibility but having inconsistent criteria for evaluating progress will not aid the DAO direction-wise. A future iteration of this dashboard could address this gap by integrating a milestone framework or guidelines to standardize progress measurement.
Hi @EmmanuelO, thank you for your proposal. Based on its current needs, we think what you’ve put forward makes sense for the DAO, and we are supportive of the proposal.
Some questions:
Hi @EmmanuelO, thank you for your proposal. Based on its current needs, we think what you’ve put forward makes sense for the DAO, and we are supportive of the proposal.
Some questions:
Also, please factor in an estimate for platform maintenance into your cost for a 12-month period. That’s all from us; we feel that this is a beneficial tool to have for delegates to gain more clarity on the progress of the different funded initiatives.
We appreciate the proposal and agree on the benefits, but we are unsure that creating a new independent tracking platform is the best approach. It might be more effective to update the "grants" page in the Arbitrum Hub portal with a built-in tracking system - this would re-use current infrastructure and avoid additional fragmentation.
Honestly I’m not sure how well it’ll work long term if there’s only one person working on development.
With such a limited budget I think you will require additional funding later for data collection, testing, or even future maintenance.
Honestly I’m not sure how well it’ll work long term if there’s only one person working on development.
With such a limited budget I think you will require additional funding later for data collection, testing, or even future maintenance.
Also, even if the platform works well, grant tracking still requires human involvement—like updating Notion/sheets, contacting project leads, and having experts review and make decisions.
At the end of the day, if a project truly cares about getting funded, they’ll likely stay on top of updates and won’t miss any milestones—maybe even check progress daily :)
Hey @Srijith-Questbook what's Questbook's policy for having the grants data composable for other apps to use? Is the grants data on the Arbitrum Questbook tracks put onchain somehow? Or is there a Questbook API that Karma GAP and others could integrate with, to be able to display that data and have it up to date?
Same thing for all the other grant platforms other than Questbook, that Arbitrum is/will be using. cc/ @DisruptionJoe
Isn't Karma GAP supposed to do this?
I don't see Karma functioning well but important to understand why so this doesn't end the same way
The idea itself is good. However, there are many parallel projects that should partially fulfill this task.
Hi. It seems to us that this proposal leans more towards the Questbook model, but we don’t want to miss the opportunity to raise a few questions and ideas:
open to exploring collaborations or partnerships as the project progresses
Hi. It seems to us that this proposal leans more towards the Questbook model, but we don’t want to miss the opportunity to raise a few questions and ideas:
open to exploring collaborations or partnerships as the project progresses
The goal isn’t to build a standalone tool and walk away but to create something scalable, adaptable, and integrated with the community’s evolving needs.
This is a solid approach, but it could be further strengthened by specifying how you plan to structure these collaborations. Are you considering bringing on additional technical team members from the outset or in later phases? Detailing this would provide confidence in the long-term sustainability of the project.
I’m considering introducing a monthly maintenance retainer to ensure it stays functional and receives updates. I would like to hear the community’s thoughts on what they think is reasonable in terms of the retainer. It would cover the cost of bug fixing, monitoring third-party API disruptions, server patching, uptime monitoring, following up on users who miss milestone updates, etc.
This is an excellent idea, but it might help to define an initial cost range for this retainer. For example, are you considering a percentage of the initial budget or a fixed figure?
You explained that you are "expanding the scope and adjusting the budget to better align with the desired features and technical requirements" and plan to use technologies such as "webhooks to monitor APIs like Questbook, Discord, Twitter, etc." and "WebSockets to broadcast real-time updates." While this expansion adds valuable functionality, it also increases technical complexity. It might be helpful to detail how you will prioritize the initial features to ensure the MVP is functional before implementing the full scope. Do you plan to iterate on the MVP based on early feedback before moving forward?
This tool isn’t meant to replace all human oversight but to streamline it
The tool’s goal is clear, but examples of the practical impact would make the proposal more compelling. For instance, how much manual effort do you expect this tool to save, or how will it specifically improve the experience for grant recipients and the community?
When we got funded, Feems was super helpful and helped load all the grants across various programs, you can see them all here: Karma GAP - Arbitrum community grants. Many grantees have continued to use it to share milestones and updates.
So, it’s not a tech issue anymore, it’s a process issue. I have messaged and talked to almost all providers who run grant programs for Arbitrum. Some providers have their own internal systems for tracking it and may be they don’t have a reason to use GAP. Grantees will do what the program operators tell them.
We have continued to add more features, impact measurement and many more things to GAP and would really want to make it work for Arbitrum if I can get some help on process or atleast someone to talk to!
I’m happy to find a way to work with you as well @EmmanuelO if you are open to it.
From our perspective, GAP appears to be a solid tool that addresses the technical challenges well, so the issue doesn’t seem to lie in its design or functionality. Instead, the real hurdle seems to be the human coordination needed to ensure all grant programs actively use it. This isn’t a problem that can be solved by simply improving the platform; it’s about creating alignment among operators and grantees. To tackle this, it might be worth exploring ways to motivate operators and grantees to engage with the platform consistently. These are just initial thoughts, but it could be something like introduce reputational incentives, where those who diligently maintain and update their milestones or enforce compliance are rewarded with recognition or other benefits. Alternatively (or perhaps in addition) having a dedicated facilitator or team to manage onboarding and act as a bridge between program operators and grantees could also help. This team could oversee compliance, answer questions, and ensure smooth communication, which might lower barriers for adoption and make the process more seamless for everyone.
Im glad you decided to go through the Questbook path, which I believe is the right choice.
I would like to add that, in my opinion, the budget seems too small to develop a truly robust platform. It might be a good idea to request additional funds when applying for the grant, in case further resources are needed down the line.
Im glad you decided to go through the Questbook path, which I believe is the right choice.
I would like to add that, in my opinion, the budget seems too small to develop a truly robust platform. It might be a good idea to request additional funds when applying for the grant, in case further resources are needed down the line.
I also think it's fantastic that we have a system in place to track each grant awarded and monitor how the corresponding milestones were achieved. This transparency ensures accountability and allows for a clear assessment of progress.
Also could you please explain if running the platform in the future will have anual costs and what would they be???
Also i would suggest you work with some of grant stakeholders like DA to know what is the most relevant infomation needed in a platform like this.
The total budget of $3,500 seems a bit tight, especially the $2,000 allocated for backend development. Will the implementation of features like real-time updates and automated alerts be limited? It’s recommended to elaborate more on the technical details, especially how these features will be achieved within this budget.
Additionally, will the tracker require long-term maintenance after it goes live? If so, what is the plan and budget for maintenance to avoid the tool being abandoned due to a lack of follow-up?
We like the proposal and agree with the benefits. We have a few questions:
Will you only be responsible for the creation of the platform, or will you also be involved in gathering all the initial data from the current grants?
What framework will you use to develop the platform?
Very interesting but is this really possible with one person tracking down every grant? I mean you would have to talk to a dozen of people.
I really do hope this will end in a great overview but im not sure.
Hey,
Thanks for a proposal that seems to be addressing the needs of the DAO.
Hey,
Thanks for a proposal that seems to be addressing the needs of the DAO.
By reading this update, I am sure you will be getting success at Questbook & if it doesn't we at Lampros DAO will be happy to help you as the work sounds interesting to us and we will be happy to help you secure the required funding.
Best luck.
Hello! Thanks for your proposal!
How do you plan to retrieve the information from the different platforms used (Questbook, powerhouse, onchain data, etc)?
While I think this is something deeply needed, I do share the opinion that you could get the funding more easily and faster from Questbook szn 3
Yes, I considered that. As far as I know, the funds have run out and it is currently pending additional funding. If it were funded, I would be very interested in pursuing that channel.
Seems the season 2 is still running and with enough funds.
This is a needed tool to ensure better visibility of ongoing DAO-funded projects. A system or hub for progress tracking will help the community see what is being done and where projects stand.
Right now, milestones are being tracked but there is no standardized framework across projects, the DAO should consider this to improve consistency. This helps with project’s flexibility but having inconsistent criteria for evaluating progress will not aid the DAO direction-wise. A future iteration of this dashboard could address this gap by integrating a milestone framework or guidelines to standardize progress measurement.
Hi @EmmanuelO, thank you for your proposal. Based on its current needs, we think what you’ve put forward makes sense for the DAO, and we are supportive of the proposal.
Some questions:
Hi @EmmanuelO, thank you for your proposal. Based on its current needs, we think what you’ve put forward makes sense for the DAO, and we are supportive of the proposal.
Some questions:
Also, please factor in an estimate for platform maintenance into your cost for a 12-month period. That’s all from us; we feel that this is a beneficial tool to have for delegates to gain more clarity on the progress of the different funded initiatives.
We appreciate the proposal and agree on the benefits, but we are unsure that creating a new independent tracking platform is the best approach. It might be more effective to update the "grants" page in the Arbitrum Hub portal with a built-in tracking system - this would re-use current infrastructure and avoid additional fragmentation.
Honestly I’m not sure how well it’ll work long term if there’s only one person working on development.
With such a limited budget I think you will require additional funding later for data collection, testing, or even future maintenance.
Honestly I’m not sure how well it’ll work long term if there’s only one person working on development.
With such a limited budget I think you will require additional funding later for data collection, testing, or even future maintenance.
Also, even if the platform works well, grant tracking still requires human involvement—like updating Notion/sheets, contacting project leads, and having experts review and make decisions.
At the end of the day, if a project truly cares about getting funded, they’ll likely stay on top of updates and won’t miss any milestones—maybe even check progress daily :)
The total budget of $3,500 seems a bit tight, especially the $2,000 allocated for backend development. Will the implementation of features like real-time updates and automated alerts be limited? It’s recommended to elaborate more on the technical details, especially how these features will be achieved within this budget.
Additionally, will the tracker require long-term maintenance after it goes live? If so, what is the plan and budget for maintenance to avoid the tool being abandoned due to a lack of follow-up?
Another point is the compatibility of the new tool with Questbook. If Questbook is renewed, how will this tool integrate seamlessly? If not, will there be any considerations for its standalone deployment?
Haha, asking too much here. It feels like you’re an all-round, super-technical genius! Keep it up, brother, and see if Arbitrum can hand over all their tools to you to finish! Keep pushing forward! 💪
This is a needed tool to ensure better visibility of ongoing DAO-funded projects. A system or hub for progress tracking will help the community see what is being done and where projects stand.
Right now, milestones are being tracked but there is no standardized framework across projects, the DAO should consider this to improve consistency. This helps with project’s flexibility but having inconsistent criteria for evaluating progress will not aid the DAO direction-wise. A future iteration of this dashboard could address this gap by integrating a milestone framework or guidelines to standardize progress measurement.
I agree with other delegates about the budget being tight. This tool could have long-term potential. It could even evolve into a data feeder for a performance system, such as a Balanced Scorecard. This would enable the DAO to track KPIs aligned with community engagement, funding efficiency, and project impact with real-time visibility.
If the OpCo proposal is approved, it should implement a similar system for its operations monitoring. A tracking tool like this would help with transparency and decision-making for governance, resource allocation and accountability.
Would it be possible to make a small MVP (Minimum Viable Product) out for the community to try out before deciding whether or not to fully fund it? It would be more realistic.
I would suggest applying directly to the Grant Program for funding.
wait... which grants, specifically, are you proposing to track really?
Yes. You’re right. I made a mistake. The season 3 is under the temperature check and season 2 was closed. Seems you can only apply for the Arbitrum Dev Tooling on One and NOVA 2.0 domain grant.
The total budget of $3,500 seems a bit tight, especially the $2,000 allocated for backend development. Will the implementation of features like real-time updates and automated alerts be limited? It’s recommended to elaborate more on the technical details, especially how these features will be achieved within this budget.
Additionally, will the tracker require long-term maintenance after it goes live? If so, what is the plan and budget for maintenance to avoid the tool being abandoned due to a lack of follow-up?
Another point is the compatibility of the new tool with Questbook. If Questbook is renewed, how will this tool integrate seamlessly? If not, will there be any considerations for its standalone deployment?
Haha, asking too much here. It feels like you’re an all-round, super-technical genius! Keep it up, brother, and see if Arbitrum can hand over all their tools to you to finish! Keep pushing forward! 💪
This is a needed tool to ensure better visibility of ongoing DAO-funded projects. A system or hub for progress tracking will help the community see what is being done and where projects stand.
Right now, milestones are being tracked but there is no standardized framework across projects, the DAO should consider this to improve consistency. This helps with project’s flexibility but having inconsistent criteria for evaluating progress will not aid the DAO direction-wise. A future iteration of this dashboard could address this gap by integrating a milestone framework or guidelines to standardize progress measurement.
I agree with other delegates about the budget being tight. This tool could have long-term potential. It could even evolve into a data feeder for a performance system, such as a Balanced Scorecard. This would enable the DAO to track KPIs aligned with community engagement, funding efficiency, and project impact with real-time visibility.
If the OpCo proposal is approved, it should implement a similar system for its operations monitoring. A tracking tool like this would help with transparency and decision-making for governance, resource allocation and accountability.
Would it be possible to make a small MVP (Minimum Viable Product) out for the community to try out before deciding whether or not to fully fund it? It would be more realistic.
I would suggest applying directly to the Grant Program for funding.
wait... which grants, specifically, are you proposing to track really?
Yes. You’re right. I made a mistake. The season 3 is under the temperature check and season 2 was closed. Seems you can only apply for the Arbitrum Dev Tooling on One and NOVA 2.0 domain grant.