What is this about?

The discussion primarily focuses on the proposal of an Experimental Incentive System for Active ArbitrumDAO Delegates, put forward by Cattin¹. The system is designed to enhance active participation in the DAO's governance processes over a six-month trial period. The proposal is divided into four sections: Option 1, Option 2, General Summary, and Next Steps. Option 1 details the incentive system, while Option 2 introduces the concept of "Karma"¹. The delegate selection process is divided into three tiers, each with specific criteria for qualification and different levels of incentives¹. The performance of delegates is measured using various parameters with specific weights¹.

In addition, Cattin proposed a new system for measuring Total Participation (TP) in the community¹. The system includes a variety of activities and their respective weights contributing to a delegate's TP score. Delegates with high TP scores will receive incentives, and there is a possibility of the entire month's budget being distributed among delegates with scores exceeding +90%¹. An additional +10% can be earned by proposing or participating in an enhancement proposal for Arbitrum DAO¹.

Furthermore, the discussion also includes the proposal for the creation of a delegate dashboard and the development of an incentive program for ArbitrumDAO². The proposal includes a detailed incentive system for delegates, divided into three tiers based on voting power, with different budget allocations and requirements for each tier. Two options for scoring are presented: Framework Tiers 1-3 or the Karma Delegate Dashboard².

Lastly, the discussion also revolves around the organization of specific working groups for ArbitrumDAO's success, as proposed by Axlvaz_SEEDLATAM.eth⁹. The idea is to establish these groups once incentives for delegates are in place.

How is the community reacting?

The community's reaction is generally positive, with members like RikaGoldberg and Jengajojo expressing their approval and offering suggestions for improvement^3,4. DisruptionJoe agrees with the proposal but suggests payments should be made in ARB rather than dollars⁵. Krst, representing the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, provides detailed feedback on the proposal, suggesting a mid-point evaluation for the incentive system, an opt-in system for delegates, and a simpler approach to delegate incentives⁷.

Why this is positive?

The proposals are seen as positive steps towards strengthening the ArbitrumDAO ecosystem. They encourage delegate participation and accountability, and they are designed to be simple and to evaluate how delegates react to the tasks to be performed. Delegates who propose or actively participate in an enhancement proposal for Arbitrum DAO and execute it will be granted an additional +10% to their TP score⁹. The organization of specific working groups could help ArbitrumDAO succeed by providing a solid basis for delegate votes⁹.

Why this is negative?

Some community members have raised concerns about the proposed tier system for delegates and the compensation model. Suggestions include a revised tier system, a requirement for delegates to outline their goals and KPIs, and changes to the compensation model, such as denominating all compensation in ARB and using time-locked ARB for payments⁴. There are also questions about the purpose of the ARB token-lock requirement⁷. There are concerns that the proposal's complexity might make it difficult to pass. There's also a worry that it might lock the group into a set of constraints that could prove challenging for the project¹¹.