Arbitrum (ARB) Incentives Program

Reading time saved: 1 minutes

5 replies, 655 views, 9 likes



Aave's application for the Arbitrum foundation's incentive grant proposals was the main topic of discussion, with community members suggesting incentives for certain markets and pools. However, concerns were raised about the DAO's status and ACI's handling of the application, potentially affecting Aave's eligibility for the grant and leading to a potential loss of hundreds of thousands or even millions in ARB grants.

The discussion primarily revolved around Aave's application for the incentive grant proposals on the Arbitrum foundation. PedroNegron, an active Aave user, expressed concerns about Aave's participation in the program, noting that the first round of applications had a deadline on Wednesday 27th. He highlighted that Aave was eligible for up to 2 million ARB incentive tokens under the "Lighthouse Grant" tier and suggested incentivizing the ETH market on the supply side and the Aave pool for native USDC on Arbitrum. He also brought up the DAO's previous decision to allocate the ARB airdrop to a "mixed option" and the idea of incentivizing GHO on Arbitrum1.

MarcZeller confirmed that Aave had indeed applied for the program and that their application was currently under review2. This news was met with relief by PedroNegron, who had previously attempted to clarify the situation on Discord without success3. MarcZeller also shared a draft of the Aave application for the STIP - Round 1 on the Arbitrum forum4.

However, EzR3aL raised a concern about the final status of the DAO not being changed from Draft to Final, questioning if this could be the reason the DAO is not recognized for the grant in the current round5. This brought a new dimension to the conversation, as it highlighted potential administrative issues that could affect Aave's eligibility for the grant.

Mintalex expressed disappointment with ACI's handling of the STIP application for Aave, which was submitted on the deadline day and contained numerous errors. One such error was the incorrect statement of the incentive period as 12 months, which drew criticism from the Arbitrum community. Despite suggestions for changes, ACI did not make timely adjustments, leading to a missed application deadline. This could potentially cost Aave hundreds of thousands or even millions in ARB grants. Mintalex contrasted this with Radiant's thorough preparation for their application and questioned who should be held accountable for Aave's potential loss7.

In conclusion, the topic centered around Aave's application for the Arbitrum foundation's incentive grant proposals. The community showed a keen interest in the process, with suggestions for incentivizing certain markets and pools. The confirmation of Aave's application and its ongoing review provided reassurance to the community members. However, concerns about the DAO's status and ACI's handling of the application added layers of complexity to the discussion. The community awaits further updates on the application's status and the resolution of these issues.

Posted 2 months ago

Last reply 2 months ago

Summary updated 2 months ago

Last updated 03/12 08:00