Arbitrum Proposal: #0x21a4ec3fd338fa4eb2230d0e6131d1411639d94cf1b27864c9a3c1c722568c08

ArbitrumDAO Off-site

Status:
Closed
For76.9%

For: 76.9%

131,067,159 ARB

Against: 0%

58,439 ARB

Abstain: 23.1%

39,347,006 ARB

Voting Period

  -  

Proposer

0xb5B069370Ef24BC67F114e185D185063CE3479f8

Description

Non-Constitutional (not even a proposal yet, just a temp check)

Should we explore an offsite?

The Problem

We’re missing structured platforms for delegates and key stakeholders to engage deeply and collaboratively on key topics around DAO strategy and organisation design, leading to bottlenecks and slow and painful decision-making.

Solution

Over a few informal conversations during EthCC, I got positive sentiment around the idea of organizing an Offsite for delegates, key stakeholders, and high-context DAO members.

But many questions need to be addressed:

Answering those questions will require engagement from the top delegates and project management work to take this from a loose idea to a refined proposal.

So before we commit to discussing the details, this temperature check aims to confirm whether delegates believe:

IMPORTANT

This proposal is about polling whether top delegates are interested in the initiative. Unless we get the majority of top delegates voting that they will get involved in shaping this initiative, we’re dropping it.

A vote in favour of this proposal does NOT mean an offsite should be executed. A vote in favour will NOT result in a Tally proposal being the next step. A vote in favour only means an offsite should be EXPLORED through conversations with top delegates and key stakeholders.

If this proposal receives significant support from the majority of top delegates: we’ll have a series of calls (group and 1-1) with the delegates and launch a couple of polls to agree on the details of the Offsite. And only then, we’ll draft a proposal with the details.