UPDATE TIME: (November 18, 2023 at 2:15 am UTC) Our proposal has been posted at Tally and will be on the ballot in 3 days https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/proposal/107148500545417261921864085816276971795902152093375547084153298266650813470763?chart=0
UPDATE: Our proposal has been posted in Snapshot and we hope we can get DAO's support, thanks! https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0xa6b2e892cfe033bb400e42ceba6667e8d33a7a326214ba097fc8f16f843a1a54
UPDATE TIME: (November 7, 2023 UTC 3:48 am)
Thank you guys very much for your input. We have re-collected more contribution information, as well as the arbiters respective wallets, discord, twitter, etc., and added them to the original proposal contribution list, but this is only a portion of the contribution data that we were able to collect again, and we are very thankful for the support of the DAO representatives!
List of Arbiters' partial contributions and arbiter profile info,For the sake of DAO reps checking for updates, we've listed them separately :point_down: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YjSCrAYJg2A1T5r8YpZx5BbfLQeyhBePqPtW5pA83dU/edit#gid=336825191 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YjSCrAYJg2A1T5r8YpZx5BbfLQeyhBePqPtW5pA83dU/edit#gid=2082014896
Additionally, the Arbiter with Discord ID BILLY#7943 has voluntarily forfeited his reward and split it equally amongst the other Arbiters, so we will be modifying the original forum proposal and will be changing the 25 Arbiters in the original proposal to 24, so that the final calculation will be: 20,833.333 $ARB tokens per member x 24 Discord Arbiter = 500,000 $ARB
Abstract: This proposal recommends the allocation of 500,000 $ARB tokens, equivalent to 0.005% of the total supply, to acknowledge and reward the outstanding contributions of Arbitrum community members known as “Arbiters.” These contributors have played pivotal roles in Arbitrum’s development, from translation and publicity to community support and protection from fraudulent activity. By establishing a transparent and equitable reward system through the Arbitrum DAO, we aim to recognize past contributions and inspire continued dedication, fostering the growth of our ecosystem.
Motivation: The Arbitrum community thrives on collaboration, decentralization, and the Ethereum community spirit. This proposal aligns with these principles and strives to:
Rationale: The Arbitrum community, driven by its contributors, has been instrumental in shaping Arbitrum over the past two years. These dedicated individuals have contributed significantly through a wide range of activities, including translation, promotion, event organization, community guidance, safety assurance, and collaboration with other communities. These efforts have been essential to the success and vibrancy of the Arbitrum community.
Partial contribution value Since 2021-2023, the work and contributions made by Arbiter are too numerous to list and quantify individually, and the data provided are statistically estimated due to the lack of prior targeted data counting and retention.
Provided millions of help to Arbitrum community users and developers. It allows Arbitrum team members to focus more on the development of technology, and also allows millions of Arbitrum community members to get answers to all kinds of questions and needs feedback. (Anyone can view the help and contributions of the arbitrators on the arbitrum Discord server, wechat groups, and other language communities, etc.)
Arbiters are online 24/7 (in Odyssey and Guild activities related to many arbiters are 16 + hours online, for community members to provide the most immediate, high-quality help) arbiter two years, has been involved in the maintenance and management of the community order, to report and stop more than 100,000 times of the scam, to ensure that hundreds of thousands of members of the community are able to get help in a timely manner and to keep the server safe.
Establish Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean and other Arbitrum local communities, such as: Chinese more than 10 WeChat groups, WeChat public number, microblog, Coinhub, and other media (due to policy reasons, a number of Chinese media has canceled the account)
The establishment of language communities has further expanded Arbitrum’s influence, attracted more than 100,000 users and developers to choose to use Arbitrum, and promoted the prosperity of the ecosystem.
Translate and proofread more than 50 Arbitrum articles, arbiters in various language areas edit, typeset and publish Arbitrum daily information more than 2,000 times, publish more than 300 articles and blogs, explain more than 50 videos, and all kinds of accounts with a large number of real fans and readers, for hundreds of thousands of users around the world to provide a quick understanding of the use of Arbitrum and the information and guidelines.
arbiter has provided community optimization, management, operation, and promotion suggestions for arbitrum more than 300 times, making the system of Arbitrum publicity, service, promotion, and operation more perfect, and allowing Arbitrum users, developers, and ecosystem projects to get better service experience and help.
dock 30 Arbitrum AMA, more than 20 events, more than 100 docking projects, affecting hundreds of thousands of community members, attracting more than 50 projects to choose an arbitrum network for deployment.
Some Arbiters have their own communities, and as KOLs in Twitter and famous communities, they vigorously promote Arbitrum through their own influence, posting blogs and all kinds of information, and their continuous influence involves hundreds of thousands of crypto community users. This has brought great enthusiasm and new users to the Arbitrum community.
arbiters has been accompanying and witnessing the prosperous development of the Arbitrum community and ecosystem, continuously carrying forward the spirit of the Arbitrum community and promoting and marketing Arbitrum.
From 6,400 wallet addresses at the initial mainnet launch to 1,270,000+ wallet addresses now, including the growth of on-chain TVLs and a thriving ecosystem. Helped and assisted Arbitrum Discord to grow from tens of thousands of members to now 460,000, providing millions of high quality help, all kinds of Arbitrum promotion and publicity with millions of views.
The following document is the basis for some of the contribute saved [arbiter Simple example table of contributions in different categories - Google Sheets]
Specifications:
Beneficiaries: Arbiters: Comprising the most dedicated contributors to the Arbitrum community over the past two years, recognized for their exceptional and humble service to the Arbitrum community.
Distribution of Incentives: The Arbitrum community requests a total of 500,000 $ARB tokens, to be evenly distributed among 24 of its members, recognizing their past work for the Arbitrum community.
Calculation: 20,833.333 $ARB tokens per member x 24 Discord Arbiter = 500,000 $ARB
Wallet Address Collection and Distribution: Arbiters’ contributor wallet addresses will be collected through a specified process, ensuring accuracy and fairness. If the proposal is approved, the Arbitrum DAO will disburse rewards to each Arbiter contributor’s address, following thorough verification and confirmation.
Future Plans: Upon the successful implementation of this proposal, we will continue to enhance Arbiter contribution methods, ensuring the sustained growth of the arbitrum community.
arbiters will continue to translate blogs, do publicity, organize AMAs, hold offline activities, provide community suggestions, optimize community services, maintain community order, provide high-quality help to the community, actively connect with various activities and projects, and help promote cooperation with other communities. On the basis of arbitrum, actively participate in the arbitrum Ambassador Program and explore more ways to contribute, and continue to provide value to the broader arbitrum ecosystem.
Our goal is to continually contribute value to arbitrum and collaborate with the broader community to foster a vibrant and thriving arbitrum ecosystem. As arbitrum continues to evolve, we will also be able to really demonstrate our knowledge of the protocol and help show more new users that arbitrum is the optimal scaling solution for Ethereum.
Milestones When the arbitrum discord server exceeds 700,000 members,or when TVL passes $3b,or when we have helped community members more than two million times, or when we have made significant progress in various types of outreach and publicity. We are committed to transparently communicating milestone updates and displaying data about what arbiters are doing or contributing.
After this proposal, we will pay attention to the statistics and retention of examples of contributions made by arbiters, and data. This will facilitate more detailed examples and data presentation at the next milestone.
Conclusion: The implementation of a robust reward system via the Arbitrum DAO is crucial for recognizing and appreciating the invaluable contributions of Arbiters to the community. This initiative will reinvigorate community engagement, foster openness, and encourage sustained participation, ultimately ensuring the long-term sustainability of the Arbitrum community. Transparency, fairness, and continuous improvement based on community input will be at the forefront of this endeavor. With this proposal, we are confident in building a more collaborative, innovative, and dynamic Arbitrum community that embodies the values and spirit of our ecosystem.
Your insights are valued and essential in shaping the future of our community. We welcome you to provide feedback and engage with us.
UPDATE TIME: (November 18, 2023 at 2:15 am UTC) Our proposal has been posted at Tally and will be on the ballot in 3 days https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/proposal/107148500545417261921864085816276971795902152093375547084153298266650813470763?chart=0
UPDATE: Our proposal has been posted in Snapshot and we hope we can get DAO's support, thanks! https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0xa6b2e892cfe033bb400e42ceba6667e8d33a7a326214ba097fc8f16f843a1a54
UPDATE TIME: (November 7, 2023 UTC 3:48 am)
Thank you guys very much for your input. We have re-collected more contribution information, as well as the arbiters respective wallets, discord, twitter, etc., and added them to the original proposal contribution list, but this is only a portion of the contribution data that we were able to collect again, and we are very thankful for the support of the DAO representatives!
List of Arbiters' partial contributions and arbiter profile info,For the sake of DAO reps checking for updates, we've listed them separately :point_down: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YjSCrAYJg2A1T5r8YpZx5BbfLQeyhBePqPtW5pA83dU/edit#gid=336825191 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YjSCrAYJg2A1T5r8YpZx5BbfLQeyhBePqPtW5pA83dU/edit#gid=2082014896
Additionally, the Arbiter with Discord ID BILLY#7943 has voluntarily forfeited his reward and split it equally amongst the other Arbiters, so we will be modifying the original forum proposal and will be changing the 25 Arbiters in the original proposal to 24, so that the final calculation will be: 20,833.333 $ARB tokens per member x 24 Discord Arbiter = 500,000 $ARB
Abstract: This proposal recommends the allocation of 500,000 $ARB tokens, equivalent to 0.005% of the total supply, to acknowledge and reward the outstanding contributions of Arbitrum community members known as “Arbiters.” These contributors have played pivotal roles in Arbitrum’s development, from translation and publicity to community support and protection from fraudulent activity. By establishing a transparent and equitable reward system through the Arbitrum DAO, we aim to recognize past contributions and inspire continued dedication, fostering the growth of our ecosystem.
Motivation: The Arbitrum community thrives on collaboration, decentralization, and the Ethereum community spirit. This proposal aligns with these principles and strives to:
Rationale: The Arbitrum community, driven by its contributors, has been instrumental in shaping Arbitrum over the past two years. These dedicated individuals have contributed significantly through a wide range of activities, including translation, promotion, event organization, community guidance, safety assurance, and collaboration with other communities. These efforts have been essential to the success and vibrancy of the Arbitrum community.
Partial contribution value Since 2021-2023, the work and contributions made by Arbiter are too numerous to list and quantify individually, and the data provided are statistically estimated due to the lack of prior targeted data counting and retention.
Provided millions of help to Arbitrum community users and developers. It allows Arbitrum team members to focus more on the development of technology, and also allows millions of Arbitrum community members to get answers to all kinds of questions and needs feedback. (Anyone can view the help and contributions of the arbitrators on the arbitrum Discord server, wechat groups, and other language communities, etc.)
Arbiters are online 24/7 (in Odyssey and Guild activities related to many arbiters are 16 + hours online, for community members to provide the most immediate, high-quality help) arbiter two years, has been involved in the maintenance and management of the community order, to report and stop more than 100,000 times of the scam, to ensure that hundreds of thousands of members of the community are able to get help in a timely manner and to keep the server safe.
Establish Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean and other Arbitrum local communities, such as: Chinese more than 10 WeChat groups, WeChat public number, microblog, Coinhub, and other media (due to policy reasons, a number of Chinese media has canceled the account)
The establishment of language communities has further expanded Arbitrum’s influence, attracted more than 100,000 users and developers to choose to use Arbitrum, and promoted the prosperity of the ecosystem.
Translate and proofread more than 50 Arbitrum articles, arbiters in various language areas edit, typeset and publish Arbitrum daily information more than 2,000 times, publish more than 300 articles and blogs, explain more than 50 videos, and all kinds of accounts with a large number of real fans and readers, for hundreds of thousands of users around the world to provide a quick understanding of the use of Arbitrum and the information and guidelines.
arbiter has provided community optimization, management, operation, and promotion suggestions for arbitrum more than 300 times, making the system of Arbitrum publicity, service, promotion, and operation more perfect, and allowing Arbitrum users, developers, and ecosystem projects to get better service experience and help.
dock 30 Arbitrum AMA, more than 20 events, more than 100 docking projects, affecting hundreds of thousands of community members, attracting more than 50 projects to choose an arbitrum network for deployment.
Some Arbiters have their own communities, and as KOLs in Twitter and famous communities, they vigorously promote Arbitrum through their own influence, posting blogs and all kinds of information, and their continuous influence involves hundreds of thousands of crypto community users. This has brought great enthusiasm and new users to the Arbitrum community.
arbiters has been accompanying and witnessing the prosperous development of the Arbitrum community and ecosystem, continuously carrying forward the spirit of the Arbitrum community and promoting and marketing Arbitrum.
From 6,400 wallet addresses at the initial mainnet launch to 1,270,000+ wallet addresses now, including the growth of on-chain TVLs and a thriving ecosystem. Helped and assisted Arbitrum Discord to grow from tens of thousands of members to now 460,000, providing millions of high quality help, all kinds of Arbitrum promotion and publicity with millions of views.
The following document is the basis for some of the contribute saved [arbiter Simple example table of contributions in different categories - Google Sheets]
Specifications:
Beneficiaries: Arbiters: Comprising the most dedicated contributors to the Arbitrum community over the past two years, recognized for their exceptional and humble service to the Arbitrum community.
Distribution of Incentives: The Arbitrum community requests a total of 500,000 $ARB tokens, to be evenly distributed among 24 of its members, recognizing their past work for the Arbitrum community.
Calculation: 20,833.333 $ARB tokens per member x 24 Discord Arbiter = 500,000 $ARB
Wallet Address Collection and Distribution: Arbiters’ contributor wallet addresses will be collected through a specified process, ensuring accuracy and fairness. If the proposal is approved, the Arbitrum DAO will disburse rewards to each Arbiter contributor’s address, following thorough verification and confirmation.
Future Plans: Upon the successful implementation of this proposal, we will continue to enhance Arbiter contribution methods, ensuring the sustained growth of the arbitrum community.
arbiters will continue to translate blogs, do publicity, organize AMAs, hold offline activities, provide community suggestions, optimize community services, maintain community order, provide high-quality help to the community, actively connect with various activities and projects, and help promote cooperation with other communities. On the basis of arbitrum, actively participate in the arbitrum Ambassador Program and explore more ways to contribute, and continue to provide value to the broader arbitrum ecosystem.
Our goal is to continually contribute value to arbitrum and collaborate with the broader community to foster a vibrant and thriving arbitrum ecosystem. As arbitrum continues to evolve, we will also be able to really demonstrate our knowledge of the protocol and help show more new users that arbitrum is the optimal scaling solution for Ethereum.
Milestones When the arbitrum discord server exceeds 700,000 members,or when TVL passes $3b,or when we have helped community members more than two million times, or when we have made significant progress in various types of outreach and publicity. We are committed to transparently communicating milestone updates and displaying data about what arbiters are doing or contributing.
After this proposal, we will pay attention to the statistics and retention of examples of contributions made by arbiters, and data. This will facilitate more detailed examples and data presentation at the next milestone.
Conclusion: The implementation of a robust reward system via the Arbitrum DAO is crucial for recognizing and appreciating the invaluable contributions of Arbiters to the community. This initiative will reinvigorate community engagement, foster openness, and encourage sustained participation, ultimately ensuring the long-term sustainability of the Arbitrum community. Transparency, fairness, and continuous improvement based on community input will be at the forefront of this endeavor. With this proposal, we are confident in building a more collaborative, innovative, and dynamic Arbitrum community that embodies the values and spirit of our ecosystem.
Your insights are valued and essential in shaping the future of our community. We welcome you to provide feedback and engage with us.
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-empowering-early-contributors-the-community-arbiter-proposal/18557/43?u=ismailemin
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-empowering-early-contributors-the-community-arbiter-proposal/18557/75?u=treasuredao
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-empowering-early-contributors-the-community-arbiter-proposal/18557/43?u=ismailemin
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-empowering-early-contributors-the-community-arbiter-proposal/18557/75?u=treasuredao
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-empowering-early-contributors-the-community-arbiter-proposal/18557/72?u=krst
Supporting the community is a priority of mine and one expressed by the DAO. Let's not be a community that has billions of funds but won't pay contributors.
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-empowering-early-contributors-the-community-arbiter-proposal/18557/70?u=plutus
the proposal is still not clear enough as the past activities of the Arbiters have not been clearly stated
https://twitter.com/CarlZielinski/status/1719173852599881943
I'm excited about more direct proposals to the DAO for retro funding and I think Discord mods play an important and undervalued role in the space.
While some details could be cleaned up, it is much better to bring in these 26 smaller protocols into the mix than to exclude them.
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-empowering-early-contributors-the-community-arbiter-proposal/18557/57
The DAO should support ecosystem contributors, but the contribution from beneficiaries and justification for each beneficiary’s reward size is not indicated in detail in this proposal. Therefore, MUX delegates are voting “Against” toward the current version of this proposal.
Whilst we support the retroactive rewarding nature of the proposal, we would ask for more detail as to who are to be the recipients.
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-empowering-early-contributors-the-community-arbiter-proposal/18557/57
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-empowering-early-contributors-the-community-arbiter-proposal/18557/46?u=krst
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-empowering-early-contributors-the-community-arbiter-proposal/18557/43?u=itublockchain
https://twitter.com/CarlZielinski/status/1719173852599881943
Rewarding early contributions is always good but without clear documentation of these Arbiters are, I vote to abstain
I see this as a delayed Airdrop for these critical contributors. It is a little high, but in general this work is under valued.
Not enough clarity on how the funds will be distributed. I'd be a yes on Tally if it was sufficiently and intelligently laid out.
This proposal feels a bit rushed and under discussed. StableLab would like to see a more detailed program in place before 500k ARB is spent
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-empowering-early-contributors-the-community-arbiter-proposal/18557/72?u=krst
Supporting the community is a priority of mine and one expressed by the DAO. Let's not be a community that has billions of funds but won't pay contributors.
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-empowering-early-contributors-the-community-arbiter-proposal/18557/70?u=plutus
the proposal is still not clear enough as the past activities of the Arbiters have not been clearly stated
https://twitter.com/CarlZielinski/status/1719173852599881943
I'm excited about more direct proposals to the DAO for retro funding and I think Discord mods play an important and undervalued role in the space.
While some details could be cleaned up, it is much better to bring in these 26 smaller protocols into the mix than to exclude them.
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-empowering-early-contributors-the-community-arbiter-proposal/18557/57
The DAO should support ecosystem contributors, but the contribution from beneficiaries and justification for each beneficiary’s reward size is not indicated in detail in this proposal. Therefore, MUX delegates are voting “Against” toward the current version of this proposal.
Whilst we support the retroactive rewarding nature of the proposal, we would ask for more detail as to who are to be the recipients.
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-empowering-early-contributors-the-community-arbiter-proposal/18557/57
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-empowering-early-contributors-the-community-arbiter-proposal/18557/46?u=krst
https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-empowering-early-contributors-the-community-arbiter-proposal/18557/43?u=itublockchain
https://twitter.com/CarlZielinski/status/1719173852599881943
Rewarding early contributions is always good but without clear documentation of these Arbiters are, I vote to abstain
I see this as a delayed Airdrop for these critical contributors. It is a little high, but in general this work is under valued.
Not enough clarity on how the funds will be distributed. I'd be a yes on Tally if it was sufficiently and intelligently laid out.
This proposal feels a bit rushed and under discussed. StableLab would like to see a more detailed program in place before 500k ARB is spent
553 days. That's quite a lot! Appreciate you taking the time to dive deeper.
Treasure DAO’s Arbitrum Representative Council (ARC) will vote AGAINST this proposal on Tally.
We would like to express our appreciation for the proposal to retroactively fund contributors for their early efforts in Arbitrum. Recognizing and rewarding the dedication of these individuals is a commendable initiative. However, after careful consideration and in alignment with concerns raised by other delegates, we find ourselves unable to support the proposal in its current form for the following reasons:
Treasure DAO’s Arbitrum Representative Council (ARC) will vote AGAINST this proposal on Tally.
We would like to express our appreciation for the proposal to retroactively fund contributors for their early efforts in Arbitrum. Recognizing and rewarding the dedication of these individuals is a commendable initiative. However, after careful consideration and in alignment with concerns raised by other delegates, we find ourselves unable to support the proposal in its current form for the following reasons:
In summary, while we share the principle of rewarding contributors, we believe the proposal requires amendments to address critical concerns raised by various delegates and the community. We encourage a thorough review and revision of the proposal to provide the necessary transparency into the retroactive payment as well as outlining a framework for compensation for future contributions.
As the voting deadline approaches, we have chosen to vote against the current proposal. We remain open for discussions and available to provide additional feedback as required.
We also tried to asses the proposal by trying to think whether we’d support it if it was forward-facing instead of retroactive. We asked ourselves whether we’d support funding 24 individuals for vaguely defined contributions in Arbitrum Discord for a year with 500,000 ARB. Although it’s not directly comparable to the case at hand, it’s an interesting exercise which can help gain some perspective.
We also tried to asses the proposal by trying to think whether we’d support it if it was forward-facing instead of retroactive. We asked ourselves whether we’d support funding 24 individuals for vaguely defined contributions in Arbitrum Discord for a year with 500,000 ARB. Although it’s not directly comparable to the case at hand, it’s an interesting exercise which can help gain some perspective.
Where do you get the 1 year come from? It has been mentioned many times that Arbiters have been contributing for 2-3 years.
553 days. That's quite a lot! Appreciate you taking the time to dive deeper.
Treasure DAO’s Arbitrum Representative Council (ARC) will vote AGAINST this proposal on Tally.
We would like to express our appreciation for the proposal to retroactively fund contributors for their early efforts in Arbitrum. Recognizing and rewarding the dedication of these individuals is a commendable initiative. However, after careful consideration and in alignment with concerns raised by other delegates, we find ourselves unable to support the proposal in its current form for the following reasons:
Treasure DAO’s Arbitrum Representative Council (ARC) will vote AGAINST this proposal on Tally.
We would like to express our appreciation for the proposal to retroactively fund contributors for their early efforts in Arbitrum. Recognizing and rewarding the dedication of these individuals is a commendable initiative. However, after careful consideration and in alignment with concerns raised by other delegates, we find ourselves unable to support the proposal in its current form for the following reasons:
In summary, while we share the principle of rewarding contributors, we believe the proposal requires amendments to address critical concerns raised by various delegates and the community. We encourage a thorough review and revision of the proposal to provide the necessary transparency into the retroactive payment as well as outlining a framework for compensation for future contributions.
As the voting deadline approaches, we have chosen to vote against the current proposal. We remain open for discussions and available to provide additional feedback as required.
We also tried to asses the proposal by trying to think whether we’d support it if it was forward-facing instead of retroactive. We asked ourselves whether we’d support funding 24 individuals for vaguely defined contributions in Arbitrum Discord for a year with 500,000 ARB. Although it’s not directly comparable to the case at hand, it’s an interesting exercise which can help gain some perspective.
We also tried to asses the proposal by trying to think whether we’d support it if it was forward-facing instead of retroactive. We asked ourselves whether we’d support funding 24 individuals for vaguely defined contributions in Arbitrum Discord for a year with 500,000 ARB. Although it’s not directly comparable to the case at hand, it’s an interesting exercise which can help gain some perspective.
Where do you get the 1 year come from? It has been mentioned many times that Arbiters have been contributing for 2-3 years.
Update on criteria - Essentially in the first year+ the Discord needed help with active moderation and community engagement due to bandwidth, and there were people (Arbiters) who were quite active and asked to help out, and thus the role was incepted and given to people who wanted to participate with a recognized role.
Update on criteria - Essentially in the first year+ the Discord needed help with active moderation and community engagement due to bandwidth, and there were people (Arbiters) who were quite active and asked to help out, and thus the role was incepted and given to people who wanted to participate with a recognized role.
great to see here community who are supporting Arb Eco Sys :+1:
Hey @ITUblockchain a couple points I can hopefully help to shed light on based on what I know:
No new Arbiters have been added after September 2022, and no new Arbiters will be added. In terms of future contribution, it can be seen as a legacy or OG role in the discord, but the proposal in discussion is for a retroactive reward and not a future or ongoing one, so this fact wouldn't be too valuable I don't think. I can't speak to the criteria of how they were selected as that was substantially before my time.
For Ambassador program, it isn't set up in a way to reward users through ARB incentives, rather there is budget allocated for Ambassadors to submit applications for hosting events, workshops, education and things of that nature so that those costs can be covered and supported by the Foundation. Furthermore the Ambassador program isn't for acquiring customer support or moderation, but rather for spreading Arbitrum/Web3 adoption globally through content, education, workshops, events etc. For moderation and customer support we recently (summer of 2023) began hiring full-time moderators at the Foundation.
Hi @olimpio We appreciate your feedback (and the great work that you do for the crypto community)
Well said. Overall, I believe the STIP is beneficial, but it has also blurred the lines with the overall purpose of the token. Even going over votes for this current snapshot, 20k ARB would still be a small voice.
The reason I referenced the airdrop was to provide a benchmark against which we could measure our contributions. Ideally, the Arbiters would have been included in the airdrop, given its intent to distribute voting power to Arbitrum contributors. However, the team chose to reward only on-chain activity. Yet, as we've observed from numerous protocols that transition to a DAO, off-chain community contributions are often recognized. We feel that receiving 2x max airdrop amount is fair, considering the time and effort the Arbiters have invested in making the community a better place and this might even be on the conservative side. It's important to understand that the ARB token is a governance token, thus it represents voting power. Given this perspective, we believe, that an allocation of 20,000 ARB tokens is proportional to the impact the Arbiters have made and the time, energy and efforts they have put into it. This voting power would allow Arbiters to have a bigger say on the future of Arbitrum.
great to see here community who are supporting Arb Eco Sys :+1:
Hey @ITUblockchain a couple points I can hopefully help to shed light on based on what I know:
No new Arbiters have been added after September 2022, and no new Arbiters will be added. In terms of future contribution, it can be seen as a legacy or OG role in the discord, but the proposal in discussion is for a retroactive reward and not a future or ongoing one, so this fact wouldn't be too valuable I don't think. I can't speak to the criteria of how they were selected as that was substantially before my time.
For Ambassador program, it isn't set up in a way to reward users through ARB incentives, rather there is budget allocated for Ambassadors to submit applications for hosting events, workshops, education and things of that nature so that those costs can be covered and supported by the Foundation. Furthermore the Ambassador program isn't for acquiring customer support or moderation, but rather for spreading Arbitrum/Web3 adoption globally through content, education, workshops, events etc. For moderation and customer support we recently (summer of 2023) began hiring full-time moderators at the Foundation.
Hi @olimpio We appreciate your feedback (and the great work that you do for the crypto community)
Well said. Overall, I believe the STIP is beneficial, but it has also blurred the lines with the overall purpose of the token. Even going over votes for this current snapshot, 20k ARB would still be a small voice.
The reason I referenced the airdrop was to provide a benchmark against which we could measure our contributions. Ideally, the Arbiters would have been included in the airdrop, given its intent to distribute voting power to Arbitrum contributors. However, the team chose to reward only on-chain activity. Yet, as we've observed from numerous protocols that transition to a DAO, off-chain community contributions are often recognized. We feel that receiving 2x max airdrop amount is fair, considering the time and effort the Arbiters have invested in making the community a better place and this might even be on the conservative side. It's important to understand that the ARB token is a governance token, thus it represents voting power. Given this perspective, we believe, that an allocation of 20,000 ARB tokens is proportional to the impact the Arbiters have made and the time, energy and efforts they have put into it. This voting power would allow Arbiters to have a bigger say on the future of Arbitrum.
Moreover, we see this retroactive reward as a gesture of appreciation of great work that those individuals were doing for the community, not necessarily as a compensation for the amount of work they’ve put into it. And as a gesture of appreciation we believe that the proposed amount is too high. We would be much more inclined to support this proposal if the amounts were 10x lower.
Moreover, we see this retroactive reward as a gesture of appreciation of great work that those individuals were doing for the community, not necessarily as a compensation for the amount of work they’ve put into it. And as a gesture of appreciation we believe that the proposed amount is too high. We would be much more inclined to support this proposal if the amounts were 10x lower.
Arbiters contributed voluntarily for 2-3 years. During this time, the Arbiters requested no payment, as their contributions were voluntary. Nobody knew if Arbitrum would evolve into a DAO, but since the DAO has been established, it would only make logical sense to distribute voting power to community members who have made the most meaningful contributions. That's the essence of a DAO. Had there been no DAO, then the Arbiters would not have made this proposal and requested for voting power.
The distribution of voting power should be proportional to the impact that community members have had, and we believe that 20,000 ARB tokens (2x max airdrop) is reasonable and fair. If we were to reduce it by 10x, that would equate to 2000 tokens each. This essentially means you're valuing the contributions of the Arbiters close to the lowest amount distributed during the token distribution airdrop. Such an evaluation doesn't seem proportional at all.
I'm very happy that Arbitrum has also started to give new incentives 💙🧡 GOOD LUCK 🧡💙🙏🏽
Moreover, we see this retroactive reward as a gesture of appreciation of great work that those individuals were doing for the community, not necessarily as a compensation for the amount of work they’ve put into it. And as a gesture of appreciation we believe that the proposed amount is too high. We would be much more inclined to support this proposal if the amounts were 10x lower.
Moreover, we see this retroactive reward as a gesture of appreciation of great work that those individuals were doing for the community, not necessarily as a compensation for the amount of work they’ve put into it. And as a gesture of appreciation we believe that the proposed amount is too high. We would be much more inclined to support this proposal if the amounts were 10x lower.
Arbiters contributed voluntarily for 2-3 years. During this time, the Arbiters requested no payment, as their contributions were voluntary. Nobody knew if Arbitrum would evolve into a DAO, but since the DAO has been established, it would only make logical sense to distribute voting power to community members who have made the most meaningful contributions. That's the essence of a DAO. Had there been no DAO, then the Arbiters would not have made this proposal and requested for voting power.
The distribution of voting power should be proportional to the impact that community members have had, and we believe that 20,000 ARB tokens (2x max airdrop) is reasonable and fair. If we were to reduce it by 10x, that would equate to 2000 tokens each. This essentially means you're valuing the contributions of the Arbiters close to the lowest amount distributed during the token distribution airdrop. Such an evaluation doesn't seem proportional at all.
I'm very happy that Arbitrum has also started to give new incentives 💙🧡 GOOD LUCK 🧡💙🙏🏽
I don't think that's a fair take. Some of the Arbiters have been around for more than 2 years, sent more than 10,000 messages in the discord where they've supported community members, provided feedback and also done work outside of the discord. Arbiters have contributed since 2021, prior to when the token was even released and before there even was an Arbitrum DAO.
Hi there! Thanks a ton for supporting our proposal. We're stoked about your backing and really appreciate your thoughts.
@peter "Retroactive" We filled those shoes when there was no DAO and not enough engineers for support. You must be new.
@Englandzz_Curia I answered all of your conserns on the community call.
Hi @MattOnChain We appreciate your time and interest in our proposal! The purpose of the proposal we've put forth is to reward Arbiters for previous work done over the past two years, which is why it proposes a one-time retroactive payment.
Arbiters (community)? I know them. In discord they have been helping. There were also contributions outside of discord, which was a bit unexpected. It looks like they contributed a lot. 500,000 Arb is not much and deserves to be rewarded and donated to them.
Hopefully this proposal will pass and they will get reward
I don't think that's a fair take. Some of the Arbiters have been around for more than 2 years, sent more than 10,000 messages in the discord where they've supported community members, provided feedback and also done work outside of the discord. Arbiters have contributed since 2021, prior to when the token was even released and before there even was an Arbitrum DAO.
Hi there! Thanks a ton for supporting our proposal. We're stoked about your backing and really appreciate your thoughts.
@peter "Retroactive" We filled those shoes when there was no DAO and not enough engineers for support. You must be new.
@Englandzz_Curia I answered all of your conserns on the community call.
Hi @MattOnChain We appreciate your time and interest in our proposal! The purpose of the proposal we've put forth is to reward Arbiters for previous work done over the past two years, which is why it proposes a one-time retroactive payment.
Arbiters (community)? I know them. In discord they have been helping. There were also contributions outside of discord, which was a bit unexpected. It looks like they contributed a lot. 500,000 Arb is not much and deserves to be rewarded and donated to them.
Hopefully this proposal will pass and they will get reward
I support your proposal. Those who have dedicated their talents and time to making the DOA and foundation more secure and profitable should be rewarded for doing so.
I just read your proposal, if this is truly the work you have done to contribute to the development of Arbitrum, I think DAO should consider this proposal. I personally support Arbiters because I think they deserve a reward from the DAO. I have also contributed to many projects before, most of them set aside a certain percentage to reward early contributors. And before that I also received help from one of the Arbiters at discord, I appreciate their work. Hope all good things will come to you. Have a nice day everyone <3
Argee. Need reward for early contributors
Agree. I support this proposal.
Agree with this. Arbiters did a lot of contribution in the Arbitrum community.
couldn't agree more!
I support your proposal. Those who have dedicated their talents and time to making the DOA and foundation more secure and profitable should be rewarded for doing so.
I just read your proposal, if this is truly the work you have done to contribute to the development of Arbitrum, I think DAO should consider this proposal. I personally support Arbiters because I think they deserve a reward from the DAO. I have also contributed to many projects before, most of them set aside a certain percentage to reward early contributors. And before that I also received help from one of the Arbiters at discord, I appreciate their work. Hope all good things will come to you. Have a nice day everyone <3
Argee. Need reward for early contributors
Agree. I support this proposal.
Agree with this. Arbiters did a lot of contribution in the Arbitrum community.
couldn't agree more!
good job, Community should be rewarded
You mean the arbiters who own purple roles in discord? I know some of you and have gotten some help before (thank you all very much :kissing_heart:.) 20k ARB each doesn't sound like much to ask, given the long hours of community service you guys have provided.
Of course, most people don't care about that... Let's see how things will move forward. :people_hugging:
Appreciate everyone's support!
Having arbiters receive the remaining unclaimed airdrop tokens would be a fair and straightforward method of distribution. There would be no need for complicated eligibility rules regarding wallets. Instead, the tokens could be sent directly to verified and trusted members of our community.
Appreciate everyone's support!
Having arbiters receive the remaining unclaimed airdrop tokens would be a fair and straightforward method of distribution. There would be no need for complicated eligibility rules regarding wallets. Instead, the tokens could be sent directly to verified and trusted members of our community.
I've been dedicated to Arbitrum for over two years, growing alongside it as an aspiring Rust/Solidity developer and noderunner. A true story of survival. All my earnings will be reinvested back into the ecosystem, supporting the community voice, infrastructure, and development. Especially focusing on Stylus.
Thank you all, I hope the rest of the community and DAO see and appreciate the strong efforts and dedication that the Arbiters bring. Stay safe out there frens.
Community should be rewarded
I hope the DAO can see our contributions to the development of Arbitrum during the past 2 years
Strongly agree, the community should be rewarded and hard work should be rewarded
I highly recognize your work and deserve rewards
good job, Community should be rewarded
You mean the arbiters who own purple roles in discord? I know some of you and have gotten some help before (thank you all very much :kissing_heart:.) 20k ARB each doesn't sound like much to ask, given the long hours of community service you guys have provided.
Of course, most people don't care about that... Let's see how things will move forward. :people_hugging:
Appreciate everyone's support!
Having arbiters receive the remaining unclaimed airdrop tokens would be a fair and straightforward method of distribution. There would be no need for complicated eligibility rules regarding wallets. Instead, the tokens could be sent directly to verified and trusted members of our community.
Appreciate everyone's support!
Having arbiters receive the remaining unclaimed airdrop tokens would be a fair and straightforward method of distribution. There would be no need for complicated eligibility rules regarding wallets. Instead, the tokens could be sent directly to verified and trusted members of our community.
I've been dedicated to Arbitrum for over two years, growing alongside it as an aspiring Rust/Solidity developer and noderunner. A true story of survival. All my earnings will be reinvested back into the ecosystem, supporting the community voice, infrastructure, and development. Especially focusing on Stylus.
Thank you all, I hope the rest of the community and DAO see and appreciate the strong efforts and dedication that the Arbiters bring. Stay safe out there frens.
Community should be rewarded
I hope the DAO can see our contributions to the development of Arbitrum during the past 2 years
Strongly agree, the community should be rewarded and hard work should be rewarded
I highly recognize your work and deserve rewards
Hey Arbiters, congrats on the on-chain AIP being created on Tally!
As a next step, please email [email protected] with the following template.
-- Email Title: Early Contributor: Arbiter Proposal - Discord ID <#XXXX>
Arbiter Discord ID: Wallet Address receiving payment if proposal passes:
--
The Discord ID and wallet address should be as per this spreadsheet.
Hey Arbiters, congrats on the on-chain AIP being created on Tally!
As a next step, please email [email protected] with the following template.
-- Email Title: Early Contributor: Arbiter Proposal - Discord ID <#XXXX>
Arbiter Discord ID: Wallet Address receiving payment if proposal passes:
--
The Discord ID and wallet address should be as per this spreadsheet.
They worked a lot and they deserve to be repaid, but I don't know if they were rewarded for their work in some way by the project.
They worked a lot and they deserve to be repaid, but I don't know if they were rewarded for their work in some way by the project.
I support the idea of rewarding Arbiters but believe it may be worthwhile to design an ongoing incentive program for Discord ambassadors (arbiters) rather than a 1-time retroactive payment.
Sorry. Never seen the real positive impact of this group. Moderating social channels is the job of Arbitrum DAO or Offchain Lab. I really doubt this is a plan by several individuals who trying to take advantage of DAO for money. Against.
I support the idea of rewarding Arbiters but believe it may be worthwhile to design an ongoing incentive program for Discord ambassadors (arbiters) rather than a 1-time retroactive payment.
Sorry. Never seen the real positive impact of this group. Moderating social channels is the job of Arbitrum DAO or Offchain Lab. I really doubt this is a plan by several individuals who trying to take advantage of DAO for money. Against.
Absolutely! And this contribution deserves to be rewarded. I want to make it clear that we don't argue on the essence, but rather on the details.
@TreasureDAO @PrincetonBlockchain @gauntlet @Plutus
The below response reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking and ideation of the two.
As we stated in our original response during temp check, we believe the requested amount is too large. We hoped to see a revised proposal at the on-chain vote as we really believe in retroactively rewarding early contributors and our concerns are around the amount, as well as the process in which we assess the contributions to reach that amount.
The below response reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking and ideation of the two.
As we stated in our original response during temp check, we believe the requested amount is too large. We hoped to see a revised proposal at the on-chain vote as we really believe in retroactively rewarding early contributors and our concerns are around the amount, as well as the process in which we assess the contributions to reach that amount.
However, since no such revision took place, we’ll stand by our decision and vote against this proposal in the on-chain vote.
Given that it’s a decision we did not make lightly, we wanted to provide some transparency in the information and thinking that led us to it.
In our opinion, retroactive contributions are to be seen as an appreciation gesture rather than compensation. Arbiters were contributing to the DAO voluntarily and without any promise of compensation from the DAO. Of course, we appreciate their contributions immensely, especially since it was at a time when the DAO was still at its infancy. It’s important to make the distinction between compensating work to be done , and rewarding contributions made.
Second thing is that we do not fully understand why the calculations are based off of 2x the max airdrop amount. As the airdrop can be interpreted as the reward for early contribution as well, it would seem only fair to have the cap on those rewards at the same level.
We also tried to asses the proposal by trying to think whether we’d support it if it was forward-facing instead of retroactive. We asked ourselves whether we’d support funding 24 individuals for vaguely defined contributions in Arbitrum Discord for a year with 500,000 ARB. Although it’s not directly comparable to the case at hand, it’s an interesting exercise which can help gain some perspective.
Lastly, since the amount per individual is ~20,000 ARB, we thought whether there are individuals in the DAO that received similar funding for contributions, and then we tried comparing the contributions (to the extent that they can be compared) to see if there are any discrepancies.
One such case was the compensation proposed for spearheading the STIP, from organising the working group, moving the proposal through the governance process and through different iterations, overseeing the execution, and coordinating with delegates. It was a lot of work in a very short period of time which arguably had a lot of impact in the DAO.
The sample of contributions provided by Arbiters in the discussion would be comparable if they represented the contributions of a single person. However, if we are to mentally divide the work among the 25 Arbiters, then the 20,000 ARB/person (500k ARB in total) request seems too high.
With that in mind, and while we understand that the contributions Arbiters made were more open-ended and it’s way more difficult to measure the impact they had, we feel there’s a discrepancy between the 20,000 ARB and the value delivered in each case.
TL;DR: We’re voting against the proposal, but if the Arbiters were to submit another proposal where the ask amount was significantly reduced and/or clearer information about the contributions of each Arbiter, we’d be much more inclined to vote in its favor.
Hello and thank you for your interest. As stated in our proposal, arbiter contribution in the Arbitrum discord is only partial. If we only track the contribution data in the discord, we cannot fully summarize all the contributions of the arbiter. At the same time, there are many cases of missing contributions, so it is relatively unfair to determine the amount of contributions based on discord data alone.
After discussion and agreement among all arbiter, we have adopted the method of equal sharing.
Hello and thank you for your interest. As stated in our proposal, arbiter contribution in the Arbitrum discord is only partial. If we only track the contribution data in the discord, we cannot fully summarize all the contributions of the arbiter. At the same time, there are many cases of missing contributions, so it is relatively unfair to determine the amount of contributions based on discord data alone.
After discussion and agreement among all arbiter, we have adopted the method of equal sharing.
Of course, if there are more contribution plans in the future, we are willing to use the model you provided, but the current model is not very applicable to the current arbiter contribution situation. @dk3
That was actually just a mistake on our end, but while we're at it - according to the mentioned spreadsheet, activity spans from 156 days to 969 days, with an average of 553 days which translates to 1.5 years on average, with just 3 of the mentioned Arbiters being active for more than 2 years.
Plutus has decided to vote against this proposal.
While we appreciate and agree with the sentiment that active community members that have contributed in different forms are important and valued, we believe there are several critical issues with the proposal in its current form. These concerns largely align with points that other delegates have brought up.
Plutus has decided to vote against this proposal.
While we appreciate and agree with the sentiment that active community members that have contributed in different forms are important and valued, we believe there are several critical issues with the proposal in its current form. These concerns largely align with points that other delegates have brought up.
We believe that the amount being requested is quite arbitrary, and that the actual contributions of different individuals and how these compare to each other are impossible to properly quantify based on the current proposal. A more comprehensive list of contributions and significantly more detail should be required, especially when the amounts asked for are substantial.
In principal we strongly support rewarding early, current and future contributors, but feel like the proposal needs to be amended to address the critical concerns brought up by a variety of delegates and the community.
Are Arbiter contributions solely housed within Discord? If so, it may be worth looking into one of the tracking solutions for Discord, at least, it can give some data on who has had activity in what channels. Will have to run it by Offchain though as you typically need elevated discord permissions, who knows maybe they already have metrics on the Discord Server.
Some that I have used in the past and can run metrics retroactively. Common Room <- Probably best for this purpose ThreadoAI Blaze
The @SEEDLatam delegation has decided to vote in Favor of this proposal at the Temperature Check.
We believe it is important to retroactively reward Arbitrers who collaborated in the growth of the Arbitrum ecosystem in its early days. These early collaborations are important and beneficial to the ecosystem and should be recognised and compensated.
First and foremost, I want to stress the importance of retroactively rewarding DAO participants who help in the ecosystem in any capacity. Every DAO member has contributed to helping Arbitrum get where it is today.
I strongly support this proposal and what it represents, but not in its current form. I have voted Against this temp-check and for the time being, and I am open to revisiting this in the next iterations. I believe in the importance of supporting the DAO through retroactive rewards to contributors.
The comment by @krst highlights a crucial point: it sets a precedent for any individual who has contributed to the Arbitrum ecosystem to be able, in the future, to request recognition for past contributions. As DAOs, it is essential that we handle these incentives with caution and clarity.
As a member of the Latam community, I am familiar with several communities, individuals and influencers who have contributed to the growth of Arbitrum. This same approach could be adopted by any other contributor to the ecosystem. While quantifying these contributions is a challenge, I believe that, at a minimum, we should demand greater specificity in these proposals and ensure that the rewards are as fair and transparent as possible.
Hello, please check our reply here. We have explained your doubts.
Thank you, Elias, for clarifying the two points we mentioned.
Absolutely! And this contribution deserves to be rewarded. I want to make it clear that we don't argue on the essence, but rather on the details.
@TreasureDAO @PrincetonBlockchain @gauntlet @Plutus
The below response reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking and ideation of the two.
As we stated in our original response during temp check, we believe the requested amount is too large. We hoped to see a revised proposal at the on-chain vote as we really believe in retroactively rewarding early contributors and our concerns are around the amount, as well as the process in which we assess the contributions to reach that amount.
The below response reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking and ideation of the two.
As we stated in our original response during temp check, we believe the requested amount is too large. We hoped to see a revised proposal at the on-chain vote as we really believe in retroactively rewarding early contributors and our concerns are around the amount, as well as the process in which we assess the contributions to reach that amount.
However, since no such revision took place, we’ll stand by our decision and vote against this proposal in the on-chain vote.
Given that it’s a decision we did not make lightly, we wanted to provide some transparency in the information and thinking that led us to it.
In our opinion, retroactive contributions are to be seen as an appreciation gesture rather than compensation. Arbiters were contributing to the DAO voluntarily and without any promise of compensation from the DAO. Of course, we appreciate their contributions immensely, especially since it was at a time when the DAO was still at its infancy. It’s important to make the distinction between compensating work to be done , and rewarding contributions made.
Second thing is that we do not fully understand why the calculations are based off of 2x the max airdrop amount. As the airdrop can be interpreted as the reward for early contribution as well, it would seem only fair to have the cap on those rewards at the same level.
We also tried to asses the proposal by trying to think whether we’d support it if it was forward-facing instead of retroactive. We asked ourselves whether we’d support funding 24 individuals for vaguely defined contributions in Arbitrum Discord for a year with 500,000 ARB. Although it’s not directly comparable to the case at hand, it’s an interesting exercise which can help gain some perspective.
Lastly, since the amount per individual is ~20,000 ARB, we thought whether there are individuals in the DAO that received similar funding for contributions, and then we tried comparing the contributions (to the extent that they can be compared) to see if there are any discrepancies.
One such case was the compensation proposed for spearheading the STIP, from organising the working group, moving the proposal through the governance process and through different iterations, overseeing the execution, and coordinating with delegates. It was a lot of work in a very short period of time which arguably had a lot of impact in the DAO.
The sample of contributions provided by Arbiters in the discussion would be comparable if they represented the contributions of a single person. However, if we are to mentally divide the work among the 25 Arbiters, then the 20,000 ARB/person (500k ARB in total) request seems too high.
With that in mind, and while we understand that the contributions Arbiters made were more open-ended and it’s way more difficult to measure the impact they had, we feel there’s a discrepancy between the 20,000 ARB and the value delivered in each case.
TL;DR: We’re voting against the proposal, but if the Arbiters were to submit another proposal where the ask amount was significantly reduced and/or clearer information about the contributions of each Arbiter, we’d be much more inclined to vote in its favor.
Hello and thank you for your interest. As stated in our proposal, arbiter contribution in the Arbitrum discord is only partial. If we only track the contribution data in the discord, we cannot fully summarize all the contributions of the arbiter. At the same time, there are many cases of missing contributions, so it is relatively unfair to determine the amount of contributions based on discord data alone.
After discussion and agreement among all arbiter, we have adopted the method of equal sharing.
Hello and thank you for your interest. As stated in our proposal, arbiter contribution in the Arbitrum discord is only partial. If we only track the contribution data in the discord, we cannot fully summarize all the contributions of the arbiter. At the same time, there are many cases of missing contributions, so it is relatively unfair to determine the amount of contributions based on discord data alone.
After discussion and agreement among all arbiter, we have adopted the method of equal sharing.
Of course, if there are more contribution plans in the future, we are willing to use the model you provided, but the current model is not very applicable to the current arbiter contribution situation. @dk3
That was actually just a mistake on our end, but while we're at it - according to the mentioned spreadsheet, activity spans from 156 days to 969 days, with an average of 553 days which translates to 1.5 years on average, with just 3 of the mentioned Arbiters being active for more than 2 years.
Plutus has decided to vote against this proposal.
While we appreciate and agree with the sentiment that active community members that have contributed in different forms are important and valued, we believe there are several critical issues with the proposal in its current form. These concerns largely align with points that other delegates have brought up.
Plutus has decided to vote against this proposal.
While we appreciate and agree with the sentiment that active community members that have contributed in different forms are important and valued, we believe there are several critical issues with the proposal in its current form. These concerns largely align with points that other delegates have brought up.
We believe that the amount being requested is quite arbitrary, and that the actual contributions of different individuals and how these compare to each other are impossible to properly quantify based on the current proposal. A more comprehensive list of contributions and significantly more detail should be required, especially when the amounts asked for are substantial.
In principal we strongly support rewarding early, current and future contributors, but feel like the proposal needs to be amended to address the critical concerns brought up by a variety of delegates and the community.
Are Arbiter contributions solely housed within Discord? If so, it may be worth looking into one of the tracking solutions for Discord, at least, it can give some data on who has had activity in what channels. Will have to run it by Offchain though as you typically need elevated discord permissions, who knows maybe they already have metrics on the Discord Server.
Some that I have used in the past and can run metrics retroactively. Common Room <- Probably best for this purpose ThreadoAI Blaze
The @SEEDLatam delegation has decided to vote in Favor of this proposal at the Temperature Check.
We believe it is important to retroactively reward Arbitrers who collaborated in the growth of the Arbitrum ecosystem in its early days. These early collaborations are important and beneficial to the ecosystem and should be recognised and compensated.
First and foremost, I want to stress the importance of retroactively rewarding DAO participants who help in the ecosystem in any capacity. Every DAO member has contributed to helping Arbitrum get where it is today.
I strongly support this proposal and what it represents, but not in its current form. I have voted Against this temp-check and for the time being, and I am open to revisiting this in the next iterations. I believe in the importance of supporting the DAO through retroactive rewards to contributors.
The comment by @krst highlights a crucial point: it sets a precedent for any individual who has contributed to the Arbitrum ecosystem to be able, in the future, to request recognition for past contributions. As DAOs, it is essential that we handle these incentives with caution and clarity.
As a member of the Latam community, I am familiar with several communities, individuals and influencers who have contributed to the growth of Arbitrum. This same approach could be adopted by any other contributor to the ecosystem. While quantifying these contributions is a challenge, I believe that, at a minimum, we should demand greater specificity in these proposals and ensure that the rewards are as fair and transparent as possible.
Hello, please check our reply here. We have explained your doubts.
Thank you, Elias, for clarifying the two points we mentioned.
The @SEEDLatam delegation has decided to vote in Favor of this proposal at the Temperature Check.
We believe it is important to retroactively reward Arbitrers who collaborated in the growth of the Arbitrum ecosystem in its early days. These early collaborations are important and beneficial to the ecosystem and should be recognised and compensated.
We would like to clarify that this decision is subject to change for voting in Tally, as we would like the proposal to include the following details in the next phase:
We should keep in mind as DAO that this kind of proposal opens the door for other contributors to ask for retroactive payments for past contributions. Perhaps in the future, we should establish a general framework to be able to filter this type of proposal.
First and foremost, I want to stress the importance of retroactively rewarding DAO participants who help in the ecosystem in any capacity. Every DAO member has contributed to helping Arbitrum get where it is today.
I strongly support this proposal and what it represents, but not in its current form. I have voted Against this temp-check and for the time being, and I am open to revisiting this in the next iterations. I believe in the importance of supporting the DAO through retroactive rewards to contributors.
A few points:
Although there is a spreadsheet (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kjVQ-utNitq8Xr5zp0yYOMg1ufCaHn6g/edit) It is unclear who the final beneficiaries of this retroactive reward are. It would be very helpful for transparency to have all of the 25 estimated people (formally) detailed in the proposal.
It is unclear what did each user contribute, specifically. The bullet points outlining a summary of all that has been done are very clear, but it lacks specifics that will help delegates gauge the value contributed.
It would greatly help the voting and decision-making process if the proposals could outline concrete actions taken by Arbiters, with links and real-world examples. Better and more concrete metrics would be extremely appreciated.
Echoing comments and concerns posted by ITU Blockchain and Curia. Should the ARB distribution be uniform considering Arbiters had different levels of participation? A more detailed approach to all of the contributions and the people involved will help a lot to bring more clarity to these points.
As said by Mysterymen there is some difficulty in measuring contributions due to the lack of documentation through time, is there nothing that can be done (as a group) to try and reconstruct it?
Looking forward to the next steps and comments to be able to move forward with retroactive rewards for DAO contributors.
Edit: I want to clearly add that I would vote in favour of this proposal should we have a (better) complete list of recipients with their contributions greater measured.
The comment by @krst highlights a crucial point: it sets a precedent for any individual who has contributed to the Arbitrum ecosystem to be able, in the future, to request recognition for past contributions. As DAOs, it is essential that we handle these incentives with caution and clarity.
As a member of the Latam community, I am familiar with several communities, individuals and influencers who have contributed to the growth of Arbitrum. This same approach could be adopted by any other contributor to the ecosystem. While quantifying these contributions is a challenge, I believe that, at a minimum, we should demand greater specificity in these proposals and ensure that the rewards are as fair and transparent as possible.
This is a personal opinion, it does not represent the opinion of the SEEDLatam delegation.
We are sorry to say that since we didn't have anyone to keep track of everyone's contributions in the beginning, a lot of them weren't saved, and it would have been unfair to submit them according to the existing saved individual contributions, so we've summarized some of the contributions we've collected so far, and because of that we've agreed that the rewards will be divided equally, and that the rewards will be paid out to the wallet of each Arbiter.
We would like to respond to the issues raised by the above representatives as follows:
Thank you guys very much for your input. We have re-collected more contribution information, as well as the arbiters respective wallets, discord, twitter, etc., and added them to the original proposal contribution list, but this is only a portion of the contribution data that we were able to collect again, and we are very thankful for the support of the DAO representatives!
We would like to respond to the issues raised by the above representatives as follows:
Thank you guys very much for your input. We have re-collected more contribution information, as well as the arbiters respective wallets, discord, twitter, etc., and added them to the original proposal contribution list, but this is only a portion of the contribution data that we were able to collect again, and we are very thankful for the support of the DAO representatives!
List of Arbiters’ partial contributions and arbiter profile info,For the sake of DAO reps checking for updates, we’ve listed them separately :point_down: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YjSCrAYJg2A1T5r8YpZx5BbfLQeyhBePqPtW5pA83dU/edit#gid=336825191
Why aren't more specific links to Arbiter's contributions provided? When we first became Arbiter, we all joined and contributed to Offchain Labs out of love for Offchain Labs, but Arbiters didn't know each other and didn't realize that OffChain Labs would issue airdrop rewards in the future, so we didn't designate a person to manage and save the information of everyone's contribution, Arbiter himself did not save his own contributions, and due to some of Arbiter's local regulatory policies on the cryptocurrency industry, a lot of information is lost and invalid, So some incomplete information that we didn't provide.
Why are rewards not distributed equally according to each individual's contribution? As mentioned above, due to a lot of data loss and failure, some Arbiters have been helping other members as supporters of the discord community, but some Arbiters have not been serving the community as supporters of the discord community, but rather have been conducting AMA's and promotional activities, etc. outside of the discord, and to singularly evaluate the contribution of a certain Arbiter, it would be Obviously not fair, this will directly erase the results of their contributions, so Arbiter unanimously decided to submit all the contributions in summary and the rewards are also evenly distributed, so as not to destroy the unity of everyone but also to let the Arbiter who has made contributions to get the rewards.
why ask for 500,000 Arb bonus and not more or less? We finalized the total reward of 500,000Arb based on other communities' rewards ratios for early contributors (e.g. Across allocating 20M ACX to the community) and based on Arbitrum's benchmarks for initial on-chain activity rewards, and we think it's fair to get 2x the max airdrop amount and even conservative considering the time and effort Arbiter has invested in making the community a better place. and effort, this may even be conservative. It is important to understand that the ARB token is a governance token and as such it represents voting rights. From this perspective, the allocation of 20,000 ARB tokens appears to be proportional to the impact Arbiter has had and the time, energy and effort they have invested, and this voting power will give Arbiters a greater say in the future of Arbitrum.
Why does this proposal not have a framework for Arbiter's future contribution programs and rewards? We are simply seeking a one-time retroactive reward from the DAO for our contributions over the last 2 years. The Arbitrum foundation has recently hired their own moderation/customer support team, and have initiated an Ambassador program. Therefore planning future contributions is not something we can assess at this time as Arbiters.
Will rewards be distributed to multi-signature wallets? We will ask Foundation to collect all the wallet address' and provide to the DAO for verification
Additionally, the Arbiter with Discord ID BILLY#7943 has voluntarily forfeited his reward and split it equally amongst the other Arbiters, so we will be modifying the original forum proposal and will be changing the 25 Arbiters in the original proposal to 24, so that the final calculation will be: 20,833.333 $ARB tokens per member x 24 Discord Arbiter = 500,000 $ARB
@ITUblockchain @cattin @olimpio @axlvaz_SEEDLATAM.eth @krst @BlockworksResearch @Michigan_Blockchain @Curia @GFXlabs @eli_defi
Hi, as stated in the proposal, because many of the previous contributions were not well kept and documented, everyone's contribution could not be quantified, so I hope this can be understood, of course, what you mentioned about the plan for future contributions, we are already in the process of planning, but this is not included in this proposal, thank you!
Hello, thank you very much for your recognition, for the Arbiter individual contribution is difficult to quantify, on this issue we have already explained in the proposal, this proposal is for the Arbiter contribution in the past 2 years of the reward, for the future reward and plan we are still planning, we also very much hope to continue to build the Arbitrum, this proposal is passed, we will be in the future of the contribution of each Arbiter to make a detailed statistic, so that for the future of the contribution of the program implementation of a more transparent, and a better quantitative distribution of rewards to each Arbiter.
Blockworks Research has voted ABSTAIN to this proposal.
We support the idea of rewarding Arbiters but need more context around the amount of time and responsibilities the group has had. Additionally, if the main responsibilities have been Discord moderators of sorts, we would prefer to see a program created that incentivizes further contributions in a sustainable manner rather than solely a one-time retroactive payment (though the program can still include this).
Blockworks Research has voted ABSTAIN to this proposal.
We support the idea of rewarding Arbiters but need more context around the amount of time and responsibilities the group has had. Additionally, if the main responsibilities have been Discord moderators of sorts, we would prefer to see a program created that incentivizes further contributions in a sustainable manner rather than solely a one-time retroactive payment (though the program can still include this).
This is not to say that we don't believe that the Arbiters have done significant work worthy of the compensation requested, rather, we'd just like to see examples of it and metrics to justify such a spend.
The below response reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @kaereste and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking and ideation of the two.
We are voting AGAINST this proposal in the temperature check, but we are open to discussing it further before it goes to onchain vote.
The below response reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @kaereste and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking and ideation of the two.
We are voting AGAINST this proposal in the temperature check, but we are open to discussing it further before it goes to onchain vote.
We want to start by saying that we definitely appreciate early contributors and we’re on board with the idea of retroactively rewarding their efforts. However, with the current state of the proposal, we can’t vote in favour of it for the reasons outlined by other delegates as well.
Specifically, we would like to see:
Moreover, we see this retroactive reward as a gesture of appreciation of great work that those individuals were doing for the community, not necessarily as a compensation for the amount of work they’ve put into it. And as a gesture of appreciation we believe that the proposed amount is too high. We would be much more inclined to support this proposal if the amounts were 10x lower.
On the other hand, if that reward was supposed to be the retroactive compensation for the work they’ve put, we should rather have a clear and open framework for incentivising such activities in the future and based on that framework assess individual contributions for retro compensation.
With the voting deadline upon us, we’ve chosen to vote against for the reasons outlined above, and we hope that these issues will be addressed and the proposal resubmitted for the DAO to review and vote on its updated version. We are happy to discuss this proposal and provide any additional feedback if needed, we would like to remind that we’re available every Thursday at 3pm UTC at our Arbitrum Office Hours (https://meet.google.com/jkj-nnop-arc).
Wait, but I think I miss the connection between this proposal and the airdrop, weren't the Arbiters eligible for the airdrop as well? And here I'm not valuing the individual contributions of the Arbiters at all, but as my second point states if this was supposed to compensate Arbiters for the work they've put in Arbitrum community then we should evaluate and price those contributions for past and future contributors.
I want to stress it once again - we're definitely not against rewarding contributors, quite the contrary, we're very supportive of it, simply the numbers and composition of recipients in this proposal seem quote arbitrary (and high) and we'd like to understand them better.
The @SEEDLatam delegation has decided to vote in Favor of this proposal at the Temperature Check.
We believe it is important to retroactively reward Arbitrers who collaborated in the growth of the Arbitrum ecosystem in its early days. These early collaborations are important and beneficial to the ecosystem and should be recognised and compensated.
We would like to clarify that this decision is subject to change for voting in Tally, as we would like the proposal to include the following details in the next phase:
We should keep in mind as DAO that this kind of proposal opens the door for other contributors to ask for retroactive payments for past contributions. Perhaps in the future, we should establish a general framework to be able to filter this type of proposal.
First and foremost, I want to stress the importance of retroactively rewarding DAO participants who help in the ecosystem in any capacity. Every DAO member has contributed to helping Arbitrum get where it is today.
I strongly support this proposal and what it represents, but not in its current form. I have voted Against this temp-check and for the time being, and I am open to revisiting this in the next iterations. I believe in the importance of supporting the DAO through retroactive rewards to contributors.
A few points:
Although there is a spreadsheet (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kjVQ-utNitq8Xr5zp0yYOMg1ufCaHn6g/edit) It is unclear who the final beneficiaries of this retroactive reward are. It would be very helpful for transparency to have all of the 25 estimated people (formally) detailed in the proposal.
It is unclear what did each user contribute, specifically. The bullet points outlining a summary of all that has been done are very clear, but it lacks specifics that will help delegates gauge the value contributed.
It would greatly help the voting and decision-making process if the proposals could outline concrete actions taken by Arbiters, with links and real-world examples. Better and more concrete metrics would be extremely appreciated.
Echoing comments and concerns posted by ITU Blockchain and Curia. Should the ARB distribution be uniform considering Arbiters had different levels of participation? A more detailed approach to all of the contributions and the people involved will help a lot to bring more clarity to these points.
As said by Mysterymen there is some difficulty in measuring contributions due to the lack of documentation through time, is there nothing that can be done (as a group) to try and reconstruct it?
Looking forward to the next steps and comments to be able to move forward with retroactive rewards for DAO contributors.
Edit: I want to clearly add that I would vote in favour of this proposal should we have a (better) complete list of recipients with their contributions greater measured.
The comment by @krst highlights a crucial point: it sets a precedent for any individual who has contributed to the Arbitrum ecosystem to be able, in the future, to request recognition for past contributions. As DAOs, it is essential that we handle these incentives with caution and clarity.
As a member of the Latam community, I am familiar with several communities, individuals and influencers who have contributed to the growth of Arbitrum. This same approach could be adopted by any other contributor to the ecosystem. While quantifying these contributions is a challenge, I believe that, at a minimum, we should demand greater specificity in these proposals and ensure that the rewards are as fair and transparent as possible.
This is a personal opinion, it does not represent the opinion of the SEEDLatam delegation.
We are sorry to say that since we didn't have anyone to keep track of everyone's contributions in the beginning, a lot of them weren't saved, and it would have been unfair to submit them according to the existing saved individual contributions, so we've summarized some of the contributions we've collected so far, and because of that we've agreed that the rewards will be divided equally, and that the rewards will be paid out to the wallet of each Arbiter.
We would like to respond to the issues raised by the above representatives as follows:
Thank you guys very much for your input. We have re-collected more contribution information, as well as the arbiters respective wallets, discord, twitter, etc., and added them to the original proposal contribution list, but this is only a portion of the contribution data that we were able to collect again, and we are very thankful for the support of the DAO representatives!
We would like to respond to the issues raised by the above representatives as follows:
Thank you guys very much for your input. We have re-collected more contribution information, as well as the arbiters respective wallets, discord, twitter, etc., and added them to the original proposal contribution list, but this is only a portion of the contribution data that we were able to collect again, and we are very thankful for the support of the DAO representatives!
List of Arbiters’ partial contributions and arbiter profile info,For the sake of DAO reps checking for updates, we’ve listed them separately :point_down: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YjSCrAYJg2A1T5r8YpZx5BbfLQeyhBePqPtW5pA83dU/edit#gid=336825191
Why aren't more specific links to Arbiter's contributions provided? When we first became Arbiter, we all joined and contributed to Offchain Labs out of love for Offchain Labs, but Arbiters didn't know each other and didn't realize that OffChain Labs would issue airdrop rewards in the future, so we didn't designate a person to manage and save the information of everyone's contribution, Arbiter himself did not save his own contributions, and due to some of Arbiter's local regulatory policies on the cryptocurrency industry, a lot of information is lost and invalid, So some incomplete information that we didn't provide.
Why are rewards not distributed equally according to each individual's contribution? As mentioned above, due to a lot of data loss and failure, some Arbiters have been helping other members as supporters of the discord community, but some Arbiters have not been serving the community as supporters of the discord community, but rather have been conducting AMA's and promotional activities, etc. outside of the discord, and to singularly evaluate the contribution of a certain Arbiter, it would be Obviously not fair, this will directly erase the results of their contributions, so Arbiter unanimously decided to submit all the contributions in summary and the rewards are also evenly distributed, so as not to destroy the unity of everyone but also to let the Arbiter who has made contributions to get the rewards.
why ask for 500,000 Arb bonus and not more or less? We finalized the total reward of 500,000Arb based on other communities' rewards ratios for early contributors (e.g. Across allocating 20M ACX to the community) and based on Arbitrum's benchmarks for initial on-chain activity rewards, and we think it's fair to get 2x the max airdrop amount and even conservative considering the time and effort Arbiter has invested in making the community a better place. and effort, this may even be conservative. It is important to understand that the ARB token is a governance token and as such it represents voting rights. From this perspective, the allocation of 20,000 ARB tokens appears to be proportional to the impact Arbiter has had and the time, energy and effort they have invested, and this voting power will give Arbiters a greater say in the future of Arbitrum.
Why does this proposal not have a framework for Arbiter's future contribution programs and rewards? We are simply seeking a one-time retroactive reward from the DAO for our contributions over the last 2 years. The Arbitrum foundation has recently hired their own moderation/customer support team, and have initiated an Ambassador program. Therefore planning future contributions is not something we can assess at this time as Arbiters.
Will rewards be distributed to multi-signature wallets? We will ask Foundation to collect all the wallet address' and provide to the DAO for verification
Additionally, the Arbiter with Discord ID BILLY#7943 has voluntarily forfeited his reward and split it equally amongst the other Arbiters, so we will be modifying the original forum proposal and will be changing the 25 Arbiters in the original proposal to 24, so that the final calculation will be: 20,833.333 $ARB tokens per member x 24 Discord Arbiter = 500,000 $ARB
@ITUblockchain @cattin @olimpio @axlvaz_SEEDLATAM.eth @krst @BlockworksResearch @Michigan_Blockchain @Curia @GFXlabs @eli_defi
Hi, as stated in the proposal, because many of the previous contributions were not well kept and documented, everyone's contribution could not be quantified, so I hope this can be understood, of course, what you mentioned about the plan for future contributions, we are already in the process of planning, but this is not included in this proposal, thank you!
Hello, thank you very much for your recognition, for the Arbiter individual contribution is difficult to quantify, on this issue we have already explained in the proposal, this proposal is for the Arbiter contribution in the past 2 years of the reward, for the future reward and plan we are still planning, we also very much hope to continue to build the Arbitrum, this proposal is passed, we will be in the future of the contribution of each Arbiter to make a detailed statistic, so that for the future of the contribution of the program implementation of a more transparent, and a better quantitative distribution of rewards to each Arbiter.
Blockworks Research has voted ABSTAIN to this proposal.
We support the idea of rewarding Arbiters but need more context around the amount of time and responsibilities the group has had. Additionally, if the main responsibilities have been Discord moderators of sorts, we would prefer to see a program created that incentivizes further contributions in a sustainable manner rather than solely a one-time retroactive payment (though the program can still include this).
Blockworks Research has voted ABSTAIN to this proposal.
We support the idea of rewarding Arbiters but need more context around the amount of time and responsibilities the group has had. Additionally, if the main responsibilities have been Discord moderators of sorts, we would prefer to see a program created that incentivizes further contributions in a sustainable manner rather than solely a one-time retroactive payment (though the program can still include this).
This is not to say that we don't believe that the Arbiters have done significant work worthy of the compensation requested, rather, we'd just like to see examples of it and metrics to justify such a spend.
The below response reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @kaereste and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking and ideation of the two.
We are voting AGAINST this proposal in the temperature check, but we are open to discussing it further before it goes to onchain vote.
The below response reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @kaereste and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking and ideation of the two.
We are voting AGAINST this proposal in the temperature check, but we are open to discussing it further before it goes to onchain vote.
We want to start by saying that we definitely appreciate early contributors and we’re on board with the idea of retroactively rewarding their efforts. However, with the current state of the proposal, we can’t vote in favour of it for the reasons outlined by other delegates as well.
Specifically, we would like to see:
Moreover, we see this retroactive reward as a gesture of appreciation of great work that those individuals were doing for the community, not necessarily as a compensation for the amount of work they’ve put into it. And as a gesture of appreciation we believe that the proposed amount is too high. We would be much more inclined to support this proposal if the amounts were 10x lower.
On the other hand, if that reward was supposed to be the retroactive compensation for the work they’ve put, we should rather have a clear and open framework for incentivising such activities in the future and based on that framework assess individual contributions for retro compensation.
With the voting deadline upon us, we’ve chosen to vote against for the reasons outlined above, and we hope that these issues will be addressed and the proposal resubmitted for the DAO to review and vote on its updated version. We are happy to discuss this proposal and provide any additional feedback if needed, we would like to remind that we’re available every Thursday at 3pm UTC at our Arbitrum Office Hours (https://meet.google.com/jkj-nnop-arc).
Wait, but I think I miss the connection between this proposal and the airdrop, weren't the Arbiters eligible for the airdrop as well? And here I'm not valuing the individual contributions of the Arbiters at all, but as my second point states if this was supposed to compensate Arbiters for the work they've put in Arbitrum community then we should evaluate and price those contributions for past and future contributors.
I want to stress it once again - we're definitely not against rewarding contributors, quite the contrary, we're very supportive of it, simply the numbers and composition of recipients in this proposal seem quote arbitrary (and high) and we'd like to understand them better.
Thank you for this @ITUblockchain Had to abstain on behalf of DAOstewards for these same reasons
We would like to commend the initiative to recognize and reward the Arbiters for their dedication and hard work. It is evident that these individuals have played a significant role in the development, support, and growth of the Arbitrum ecosystem over the past years. Their contributions in various areas such as translation, promotion, community support, and fraud prevention are commendable and undoubtedly deserve recognition.
Points for Consideration
We would like to commend the initiative to recognize and reward the Arbiters for their dedication and hard work. It is evident that these individuals have played a significant role in the development, support, and growth of the Arbitrum ecosystem over the past years. Their contributions in various areas such as translation, promotion, community support, and fraud prevention are commendable and undoubtedly deserve recognition.
Points for Consideration
However, we believe there are some aspects of this proposal, particularly concerning reward distribution, that need a closer look and potential modification:
For instance, Arbiter <.fyray>, despite being part of the Arbitrum Discord for a mere 6 months, has showcased more engagement than , a member for three years. Such disparities should influence the distribution metrics.
In short, while it's great to want to reward the Arbiters, the way the rewards are given out needs some tweaking. Ensuring our rewards reflect industry standards and correspond to the effort put in will make this reward approach more equitable. Given the current state of the proposal and the points highlighted, we are inclined to vote against it unless these considerations are addressed.
Firstly, on behalf of ITU Blockchain, we wish to express our gratitude for your efforts in preparing this proposal. We recognize the significant contributions made by "Arbiters" through Discord and various community applications. Although we are unable to catalog messages sent by those with the Arbiter role on Discord, the community is well-acquainted with you and acknowledges your previous assistance.
However, within this proposal, we hoped to see a clear articulation regarding the criteria for selecting "Arbiters", whether obtaining this role is still possible, and a quantitative expression of the contributions made by those who currently hold this role.
Firstly, on behalf of ITU Blockchain, we wish to express our gratitude for your efforts in preparing this proposal. We recognize the significant contributions made by "Arbiters" through Discord and various community applications. Although we are unable to catalog messages sent by those with the Arbiter role on Discord, the community is well-acquainted with you and acknowledges your previous assistance.
However, within this proposal, we hoped to see a clear articulation regarding the criteria for selecting "Arbiters", whether obtaining this role is still possible, and a quantitative expression of the contributions made by those who currently hold this role.
Currently, a grant for a closed group consisting of 25 individuals is under consideration. We wholeheartedly agree that this group should be rewarded in line with their past contributions, but believe that this should be done in collaboration with the Arbitrum Foundation. Integrating the rewards with the Arbitrum Foundation's recent initiative, the Ambassador Program seems to be a more logical approach. In hopes of collaborating on this matter, we are tagging the officials from the Arbitrum Ambassador program: @eli_defi @AnaTech.eth
Due to the reasons mentioned above, we choose to cast an "Abstain" vote in this decision.
Can you give a list of the contributors, their social networks and discord and at least some metrics links of the work they have done?
Can you give a list of the contributors, their social networks and discord and at least some metrics links of the work they have done?
This is exactly what's missing from this proposal. If it's just 25 people, it would be really helpful to have a list of them and a sentence or two about what each has done to merit 20,000 ARB. The concept is fine, but this kind of bookkeeping is important.
Distribution of Incentives: The Arbitrum community requests a total of 500,000 $ARB tokens, to be evenly distributed among 25 of its members, recognizing their past work for the Arbitrum community.
Distribution of Incentives: The Arbitrum community requests a total of 500,000 $ARB tokens, to be evenly distributed among 25 of its members, recognizing their past work for the Arbitrum community.
Calculation: 20,000 $ARB tokens per member x 25 Discord Arbiters = 500,000 $ARB.
Wallet Address Collection and Distribution: Arbiters’ contributor wallet addresses will be collected through a specified process, ensuring accuracy and fairness. If the proposal is approved, the Arbitrum DAO will disburse rewards to each Arbiter contributor’s address, following thorough verification and confirmation.
Can you give a list of the contributors, their social networks and discord and at least some metrics links of the work they have done?
And another question, will the funds be sent to a multisig? or do you intend to send 20k ARB to each address?
Hello, thank you very much for recognizing us, the reason why the rewards are not distributed according to the contribution, that's because a lot of the work can't be quantified, and a lot of the data are not well preserved, all for the sake of fairness we choose to distribute them evenly, as you can see, most of the arbiters are from the Chinese community, but they have made great contributions in both the Chinese and the English community, and part of the proposal for these jobs are also listed, thank you for your support! :heart:
Hello, this proposal is simply a reward for the contributions made by early community Arbiters, thanks!
Michigan Blockchain will be voting FOR this proposal on the temperature check. We believe it is critical to recognize and support early ecosystem contributors such as the Arbiters and utilize retroactive funding as a mechanism for distribution. Prior to this proposal going onchian, however, we would like to see further transparency as to who will be the recipients of the retroactive rewards as well as their contributions that qualify them as one of the recipients. We hope this proposal enables future contributor rewards as well as establishes a framework of transparency and a systemic approach for determining rewarded amounts going forward.
Arbiters: Comprising the most dedicated contributors to the Arbitrum community over the past two years, recognized for their exceptional and humble service to the Arbitrum community.
Arbiters: Comprising the most dedicated contributors to the Arbitrum community over the past two years, recognized for their exceptional and humble service to the Arbitrum community.
I believe this proposal is an amazing start and contributors that helped without getting paid should most def be rewarded.
It would be interesting to see how these Arbiters were chosen and how their contributions were quantified. Maybe some were missed? I'm also a little curios why would they all receive the same amount of $ARB? :smiley:
At a first glance it does seem that most of the rewards would go to the Arbitrum Asian community which is indeed interesting.
Our proposal has been posted in Snapshot and we hope we can get DAO's support, thanks! https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0xa6b2e892cfe033bb400e42ceba6667e8d33a7a326214ba097fc8f16f843a1a54
I support the ideas too, every great work should be rewarded.
I fully support the proposal to reward the Arbitrum community's This initiative is crucial to emphasize community unity, recognize dedication, and spotlight those who have notably influenced Arbitrum's evolution.
However, alongside my support, I'd like to address several concerns and suggestions:
I fully support the proposal to reward the Arbitrum community's This initiative is crucial to emphasize community unity, recognize dedication, and spotlight those who have notably influenced Arbitrum's evolution.
However, alongside my support, I'd like to address several concerns and suggestions:
In conclusion, while I stand firmly behind this proposal's intent, addressing the aforementioned concerns would refine it further. This approach would ensure fairness and inclusivity and pave the way for continued growth and collaboration.
let me know what you think guys!
All good works should be rewarded! I strongly agree
Thank you for recognizing it.
Yes, Purple roles, great to receive hear that, thank you! :heart:
We need more members to get involved and voice their opinions
Thank you so much for your recognition and support!
Thank you for your support. :heart:
Hi, the Arb requested in this proposal is the full amount of the award for our contribution over the past two years.
No other additional bonuses, thank you for your support!
I agree that early contributors should be rewarded, but the 25 arbiter role owners are far from sufficient to cover all early contributors. If we aim to reward early contributors, it should be as comprehensive as possible, or it might backfire. I hope this proposal can be written in more detail and improved.
Thank you for this @ITUblockchain Had to abstain on behalf of DAOstewards for these same reasons
We would like to commend the initiative to recognize and reward the Arbiters for their dedication and hard work. It is evident that these individuals have played a significant role in the development, support, and growth of the Arbitrum ecosystem over the past years. Their contributions in various areas such as translation, promotion, community support, and fraud prevention are commendable and undoubtedly deserve recognition.
Points for Consideration
We would like to commend the initiative to recognize and reward the Arbiters for their dedication and hard work. It is evident that these individuals have played a significant role in the development, support, and growth of the Arbitrum ecosystem over the past years. Their contributions in various areas such as translation, promotion, community support, and fraud prevention are commendable and undoubtedly deserve recognition.
Points for Consideration
However, we believe there are some aspects of this proposal, particularly concerning reward distribution, that need a closer look and potential modification:
For instance, Arbiter <.fyray>, despite being part of the Arbitrum Discord for a mere 6 months, has showcased more engagement than , a member for three years. Such disparities should influence the distribution metrics.
In short, while it's great to want to reward the Arbiters, the way the rewards are given out needs some tweaking. Ensuring our rewards reflect industry standards and correspond to the effort put in will make this reward approach more equitable. Given the current state of the proposal and the points highlighted, we are inclined to vote against it unless these considerations are addressed.
Firstly, on behalf of ITU Blockchain, we wish to express our gratitude for your efforts in preparing this proposal. We recognize the significant contributions made by "Arbiters" through Discord and various community applications. Although we are unable to catalog messages sent by those with the Arbiter role on Discord, the community is well-acquainted with you and acknowledges your previous assistance.
However, within this proposal, we hoped to see a clear articulation regarding the criteria for selecting "Arbiters", whether obtaining this role is still possible, and a quantitative expression of the contributions made by those who currently hold this role.
Firstly, on behalf of ITU Blockchain, we wish to express our gratitude for your efforts in preparing this proposal. We recognize the significant contributions made by "Arbiters" through Discord and various community applications. Although we are unable to catalog messages sent by those with the Arbiter role on Discord, the community is well-acquainted with you and acknowledges your previous assistance.
However, within this proposal, we hoped to see a clear articulation regarding the criteria for selecting "Arbiters", whether obtaining this role is still possible, and a quantitative expression of the contributions made by those who currently hold this role.
Currently, a grant for a closed group consisting of 25 individuals is under consideration. We wholeheartedly agree that this group should be rewarded in line with their past contributions, but believe that this should be done in collaboration with the Arbitrum Foundation. Integrating the rewards with the Arbitrum Foundation's recent initiative, the Ambassador Program seems to be a more logical approach. In hopes of collaborating on this matter, we are tagging the officials from the Arbitrum Ambassador program: @eli_defi @AnaTech.eth
Due to the reasons mentioned above, we choose to cast an "Abstain" vote in this decision.
Can you give a list of the contributors, their social networks and discord and at least some metrics links of the work they have done?
Can you give a list of the contributors, their social networks and discord and at least some metrics links of the work they have done?
This is exactly what's missing from this proposal. If it's just 25 people, it would be really helpful to have a list of them and a sentence or two about what each has done to merit 20,000 ARB. The concept is fine, but this kind of bookkeeping is important.
Distribution of Incentives: The Arbitrum community requests a total of 500,000 $ARB tokens, to be evenly distributed among 25 of its members, recognizing their past work for the Arbitrum community.
Distribution of Incentives: The Arbitrum community requests a total of 500,000 $ARB tokens, to be evenly distributed among 25 of its members, recognizing their past work for the Arbitrum community.
Calculation: 20,000 $ARB tokens per member x 25 Discord Arbiters = 500,000 $ARB.
Wallet Address Collection and Distribution: Arbiters’ contributor wallet addresses will be collected through a specified process, ensuring accuracy and fairness. If the proposal is approved, the Arbitrum DAO will disburse rewards to each Arbiter contributor’s address, following thorough verification and confirmation.
Can you give a list of the contributors, their social networks and discord and at least some metrics links of the work they have done?
And another question, will the funds be sent to a multisig? or do you intend to send 20k ARB to each address?
Hello, thank you very much for recognizing us, the reason why the rewards are not distributed according to the contribution, that's because a lot of the work can't be quantified, and a lot of the data are not well preserved, all for the sake of fairness we choose to distribute them evenly, as you can see, most of the arbiters are from the Chinese community, but they have made great contributions in both the Chinese and the English community, and part of the proposal for these jobs are also listed, thank you for your support! :heart:
Hello, this proposal is simply a reward for the contributions made by early community Arbiters, thanks!
Michigan Blockchain will be voting FOR this proposal on the temperature check. We believe it is critical to recognize and support early ecosystem contributors such as the Arbiters and utilize retroactive funding as a mechanism for distribution. Prior to this proposal going onchian, however, we would like to see further transparency as to who will be the recipients of the retroactive rewards as well as their contributions that qualify them as one of the recipients. We hope this proposal enables future contributor rewards as well as establishes a framework of transparency and a systemic approach for determining rewarded amounts going forward.
Arbiters: Comprising the most dedicated contributors to the Arbitrum community over the past two years, recognized for their exceptional and humble service to the Arbitrum community.
Arbiters: Comprising the most dedicated contributors to the Arbitrum community over the past two years, recognized for their exceptional and humble service to the Arbitrum community.
I believe this proposal is an amazing start and contributors that helped without getting paid should most def be rewarded.
It would be interesting to see how these Arbiters were chosen and how their contributions were quantified. Maybe some were missed? I'm also a little curios why would they all receive the same amount of $ARB? :smiley:
At a first glance it does seem that most of the rewards would go to the Arbitrum Asian community which is indeed interesting.
Our proposal has been posted in Snapshot and we hope we can get DAO's support, thanks! https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0xa6b2e892cfe033bb400e42ceba6667e8d33a7a326214ba097fc8f16f843a1a54
I support the ideas too, every great work should be rewarded.
I fully support the proposal to reward the Arbitrum community's This initiative is crucial to emphasize community unity, recognize dedication, and spotlight those who have notably influenced Arbitrum's evolution.
However, alongside my support, I'd like to address several concerns and suggestions:
I fully support the proposal to reward the Arbitrum community's This initiative is crucial to emphasize community unity, recognize dedication, and spotlight those who have notably influenced Arbitrum's evolution.
However, alongside my support, I'd like to address several concerns and suggestions:
In conclusion, while I stand firmly behind this proposal's intent, addressing the aforementioned concerns would refine it further. This approach would ensure fairness and inclusivity and pave the way for continued growth and collaboration.
let me know what you think guys!
All good works should be rewarded! I strongly agree
Thank you for recognizing it.
Yes, Purple roles, great to receive hear that, thank you! :heart:
We need more members to get involved and voice their opinions
Thank you so much for your recognition and support!
Thank you for your support. :heart:
Hi, the Arb requested in this proposal is the full amount of the award for our contribution over the past two years.
No other additional bonuses, thank you for your support!
I agree that early contributors should be rewarded, but the 25 arbiter role owners are far from sufficient to cover all early contributors. If we aim to reward early contributors, it should be as comprehensive as possible, or it might backfire. I hope this proposal can be written in more detail and improved.