Optimism
Mission Request Approvals
Mission requests are in the stage in which delegates need to review them and provide, or not, their approval. As a reminder, mission requests need at least 4 approvals by top 100 delegates in order to move to a vote. The deadline for approvals is February 7th at 19:00 UTC.
A16z’s Continued Participation in Optimism Governance
Rshuel from A16z’s governance team published a post to identify two wallets through which a16z crypto is going to be participating in Optimism Governance. The wallets collectively hold ~10M OP.
The two wallets in question are:
-
0xf11B6a8c3CB8bb7dbC1518A613b10CEb0BBfc06b
-
0xEff8d84e0fD304550DA242040CcD45bd44CE71f1
Discuss with L2BEAT
We’ll be spending the next week reviewing proposals and providing our approval to the once we believe are valuable to the collective. If you want to make sure we don’t miss a mission request you believe we’d be interested in, please let us know.
When/where to catch us:
You can discuss mission requests as well as anything else related to Optimism during our Optimism Office Hours every Tuesday at 4 pm UTC.
Arbitrum
Temp Check - [Constitutional] Changes to the Constitution and the Security Council Election Process
This Constitutional AIP proposes improvements to the ArbitrumDAO Constitution and the Security Council election process.
The Snapshot vote ends on Monday, February 5th 2024, at 5:17 pm UTC.
For more context, you can read the forum post here.
Temp Check - [Non-Constitutional]: Arbitrum Stable Treasury Endowment Program
This framework supports the budding RWA ecosystem on Arbitrum by diversifying 35 million ARB from our treasury (~1%) into stable & liquid bills or money market instruments earning a rate of return roughly equivalent to US Treasuries
The Snapshot vote ends on Wednesday, February 7th 2024, at 9:00 pm UTC.
For more context, you can read the forum post here.
Arbitrum Open Governance Call #11
We’ll be having our 11th Open Governance Call on Wednesday 7th of February 2024. The agenda for the call can be found here, and as always is open to anyone who wants to bring up a specific topic to be discussed.
Plurality Labs Milestone 1 Review by L2BEAT
On the occasion of Plurality Labs’ Milestone 2 proposal going to Snapshot for a temp-check vote (which has since been withdrawn), we (L2BEAT) published our review of Milestone 1.
In the coming weeks, we’ll also be reviewing Questbook’s grant program and sharing our findings in the forums.
Self-Voting Policy Discussion
ImmutableLawyer started a discussion around the issue of self-voting and whether or not the DAO should have a more streamlined approach to the phenomenon. The discussion aims to highlight the conflict of interests concerns surrounding self-voting within the DAO while also addressing the challenges in determining what constitutes a ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ conflict of interest.
Arbitrum Research and Development Collective (ARDC): Applications and Elections
The applications for the ARDC are open until 5th of February 2024. After applications close, there will be a 7-day window for KYC/KYB + proposal review period, 3 days after which (so on the 20th of February 2024), the elections will take place on Snapshot.
Learnings from STIP
Tnorm, who spearheaded the working group behind the Short Term Incentives Proposal (STIP), shared a post which consolidates feedback from a series of interviews conducted by him and aims to synthesize lessons from the DAO’s status post-STIP.
The post contains a lot of useful insights into what went well and what worked poorly. Some of the most important takeaways are (in a condensed form):
- Contributors shouldn’t hesitate to speak their mind if you are to participate in a constructive way.
- To effectively evaluate strategic alignment with the DAO, future programs must define clear objectives
- The DAO should first focus on creating more intentional programs with clear objectives before working on making them as inclusive as possible.
- DAO participants should be wary of limiting their views and degree of innovation by the precedent that past or currently running programs have set.
[RFC] Create a Standardized Guideline for Non-Security Council Elections
Bob-Rossi submitted an RFC to start a discussion regarding a possible Constitutional AIP that seeks to set a standardized guideline for non-security council elections run by the DAO. Since inception, the DAO has held seven different Snapshot elections across three different projects. Due to a lack of direction in the Arbitrum DAO Constitution, all three projects varied their Snapshot voting approach.
The 3 main discussion items are:
- Voting type
- Ranked Choice
- Single Choice
- Weighted
- Voting Privacy
- Application Window & Election Period
Delegate Incentive Program Applications
SEEDGov created a post in which delegates can express their interest to participate in the delegate incentive program which recently passed through an on-chain vote. The eligibility criteria are:
- Voting Power: >50K ARB, corresponding to 175 delegates. (Source: Arbitrum Delegates and Voting Power - Dune Analytics 3).
- Historical Participation Rate (Tally): Over 25%. We would like to express that for the calculation of the participation rate in tally, proposals with the prefix “[OLD]” or those that have been considered “tests” will not be taken into account.
Also important to note that in order for an eligible delegate to receive compensation, they’ll need to go through a KYC process administered by the Arbitrum Foundation.
SEEDGov also conducted a test of the criteria to showcase how the program would work.
If you have any questions in regards to the Delegate Incentive Program, you can ask SEEDGov in this thread.
Pre-Proposal for a Strategy Framework
Danielo from RnDAO published a post in order to start a discussion around and propose a “strategy ontology” - a framework serving as an agreed format to define the strategy for the Arbitrum DAO. This framework, called SKIs Framework, showcases a comprehensive mapping of essential functions of a system (as applied to ArbitrumDAO) for viability. All functions identified in the framework are essential; however, they’re not equally urgent.
Right now, they’re looking for feedback on whether the framework presented is clear and understandable, and whether it’s something that DAO participants would use.
[AIP] ArbOS Version 20
This AIP proposes a number of improvements to Arbitrum chains, including the capability to leverage EIP 4844 to post batches of L2 transactions as Blobs on L1 Ethereum at a cheaper price, and enabling partial support for most of the changes included in Ethereum’s Dencun upgrade.
The proposal is currently undergoing security audits, but it’s ready to be reviewed, discussed, and considered for adoption by the DAO.
[RFC] Experiential Incentive Program for Arbitrum Game Builders
Blanklee submitted an RFC which seeks to introduce the idea of establishing a dedicated Experimental Incentive Program for Games(EIPG). This plan involves quick funding for each game builder, providing 30K USDT-valued $ARB from the treasury, with an easy and expedited process.
[RFC] Funding for Into the Dungeons: Machinata - a PvP Digital Miniature Game V2
After receiving feedback from delegates, thechaingamer.eth returned to the forum with a revised version of their proposal to fund ‘Into The Dungeons’. The ask is for the DAO to fund the game with 60,000 $ARB up front as a first tranche, followed by another 2 tranches of 60,000 $ARB each for a total of 180,000 $ARB.
The game already has a playable prototype and each tranche is tied to specific deliverables as mentioned in the proposal.
Discuss with L2BEAT
We’re curious to hear the community’s thoughts on the topic of self-voting, as well as on the idea of creating standardized guidelines for elections. We’re also very interested in discussing the STEP proposal, especially with people who have a strong financial background and can advise us on things we should be wary of in order to make an informed decision.
In addition, we’d like to dive deeper into the concept of having a longer term strategy which can act as a north star for the DAO and the discussion started by Danielo seems like a good opportunity to do so.
Lastly, we’re keen to talk with individuals or groups applying for a position in the ARDC in order to get a better understanding of their experience and make better decisions during the upcoming elections.
When/where to catch us:
You can find us to discuss all of the above and more during the Open Governance Call next week, and also during our Arbitrum Office Hours which take place every Thursday at 4pm UTC.
Uniswap
Onboarding Package for Different Chains
Following the discussion which started 2 weeks ago on Uniswap’s revitalization and growth, which brought forward the idea of creating an onboarding package for newer chains on which V3 is deployed, there were several votes held to gauge community’s opinion on how big of an onboarding package should be created for which chain.
Discuss with L2BEAT
Our understanding is that we should allocate smaller amounts of UNI to newer and smaller (in terms of TVL) chains, while allocating bigger -perhaps even bigger than what proposed- packages to bigger chains (e.g. BSC, Avalanche). We’ll be voting accordingly during temp-check, but we’d like to discuss with more knowledgeable parties before the on-chain vote.
When/where to catch us:
You can find us to discuss the UNI onboarding packages as well as any other matter relevant to Uniswap DAO during our Uniswap Office Hours that take place every Friday at 4 pm UTC.
Hop
[HIP 43] Proposal to create Head of DAO Operations Role
This proposal is for the DAO to vote on whether to add a new role called the Head of DAO Operations to act as a liaison between the different participants and subgroups of the DAO such as; core developer team, grants committee, ambassadors, delegates, multisig signers and more.
The Snapshot vote ends on Monday, February 5th 2024, at 7:02 am UTC.
Discuss with L2BEAT
There’s currently some debate happening under the forum post regarding the Head of DAO Operations role regarding the need for such a role, as well as the mechanics of the role’s compensation. We’d be interested in discussing it further with the community.
When/where to catch us:
You can find us to discuss all things Hop during our Hop Office Hours every Friday at 4 pm UTC.
Polygon
An Update on Polygon Labs, Polygon Ventures and Polygon ID
Marc Boiron, Polygon Labs’ CEO, published a copy of an update he shared the Polygon Labs team in regard to optimizing the organization.
Council Transparency Report: PIP 29
In this transparency report, the Protocol Council (‘PC’) aims to outline the execution details of the removal of 0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000001 assigned to the TIMELOCK_ADMIN_ROLE on the OpenZeppelin contracts. After evaluating the efficacy, impact, execution specifications, and security considerations, the PC has reached a majority consensus of 7/13, thereby queuing the change in execution.
Discuss with L2BEAT
We’re very interested in discussing with community members about Polygon so please reach out if you have anything you believe we can somehow contribute to.
When/where to catch us:
You can find us during our Polygon Office Hours which happen every Friday at 3 pm UTC.
Starknet
There weren’t any major developments this week in Starknet as far as we know. If you think we’ve missed something, please reach out and let us know.
Discuss with L2BEAT
If there’s anything related to Starknet that you want to discuss, we’re happy to talk.
When/where to catch us:
You can catch us to discuss Starknet during our Starknet Office Hours every Friday at 3 pm UTC.
Connext
Formal Vote - Community Leadership Incentivization
This proposed CGP describes the scope, engagement, and compensation of Community Leaders who are tasked with providing necessary support functions for the Connext community in an effort to keep community operations running and to monitor the completion of projects and tasks.
The proposal requests a quarterly budget of 295,000 NEXT tokens and a one time retroactive compensation of 147,522 NEXT, totaling 442,522 NEXT.
The Snapshot vote ends on Thursday, February 8th 2024, at 3:56 pm UTC.
Formal Vote - Extend Existing Incentives Program on Velodrome
This proposal aims to extend Connext’s liquidity program on Velodrome to give delegates and the broader community time to decide on how they’d like to optimize Connext’s liquidity strategy long term as per discussion here.
The overall cost of extending the incentives program would be $5K worth of NEXT tokens for 8 weeks for a total of $40k.
The Snapshot vote ends on Friday, February 9th 2024, at 4:29 pm UTC.
[RFC] The Rollup Ecosystem Education Partnership
In this RFC, The Rollup is proposing to become an educational content partner to Connext to drive product awareness, further engagement, and support product vision. The Rollup is asking for 100,000 NEXT tokens for 6-month duration for the scope and deliverables described in the proposal.
Discuss with L2BEAT
We’re generally in favor of rewarding participants for their contributions to the DAO so we’re probably going to support the community leadership incentivization proposal. That said, we will be taking a closer look at the proposal to better understand the relationship between the impact created and the total compensation. We’d be happy to directly chat with any administrator, moderator or ambassador that will receive these incentives to get their perspective.
We were skeptical about the proposal to optimize the incentive program on Velodrome. However, extending the current one until the DAO figures out a way forward doesn’t seem like a bad middle ground solution. We’re keen to hear the community’s opinion on this before forming a stronger opinion on what the path forward should be.
When/where to catch us:
You can find us to discuss all the above and more during our Connext Office Hours every Friday at 4 pm UTC.