Reading time saved: 4 minutes
6 replies, 735 views, 43 likes
A proposed six-month incubation program for blockchain product development on Arbitrum, involving 64 participants, is generally well-received by the community. However, concerns are raised about the funding, need for comprehensive support, and requests for more information about the program's execution and participant selection criteria.
This discussion revolves around a proposed incubation program for blockchain product development on Arbitrum. The initiative, proposed by Iamoracle1, aims to foster collaboration among builders and launch their products on Arbitrum. The program is set to run for six months and will involve 64 participants with experience in product management and software development. The participants will work in teams to build 16 different products, and at the end of the program, a competition will determine the top four teams, who will receive cash prizes.
The community's reaction to the proposal is generally positive, with some members offering constructive feedback. Arulprakash suggested that the proposed funding seems small and recommended that Arbitrum should provide more comprehensive support, similar to Polygon's program2. Nice-place praised the program, comparing it to other successful initiatives like CGP 2.0 and Compound Finance3. Krst, representing the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, expressed support for the program but requested additional information about the execution, the proposer's suitability, the operational process, and the participant selection criteria5.
The program is seen as a positive step towards fostering innovation and increasing the number of builders in the Arbitrum ecosystem. It is expected to result in the development of 16 new products, thereby expanding the range of solutions available on the platform. The program also provides an opportunity for collaboration and learning among participants, which could lead to the development of more innovative solutions in the future.
Some concerns were raised about the proposed funding and the need for more comprehensive support for the program. There were also requests for more information about the execution of the program, the proposer's suitability, the operational process, and the participant selection criteria. These concerns highlight the need for more transparency and support to ensure the success of the program.
Posted 5 months ago
Last reply 3 months ago
Summary updated 25 days ago
Last updated 03/12 14:24