The SimScore analysis of the Snapshot round reveals clear consensus on improving the proposal in specific ways. These revisions would transform the proposal to better reflect the collective intelligence of delegates:
Supporting Response: Response #1 (51% similarity): "I don't agree with internalizing into the Arbitrum Foundation... What I think we need is an Arbitrum DAO run, dedicated Audit Subsidy program, that would run continuously and would report their actions to the DAO with the utmost transparency possible."
Current section: "We propose a committee with a mixture of technical expertise and DAO representation who will have the necessary skills and time to review proposals on an on-going basis.
Chair: Team Member - Arbitrum Foundation (Waiving Payment) Team Member - Offchain Labs (Waiving Payment) Technical Expert - Elected by DAO Team Member - ArbitrumDAO's OpCo (when operational)"
Revised section: "We propose a committee with a mixture of technical expertise and DAO representation who will have the necessary skills and time to review proposals on an on-going basis.
Chair: Technical Expert - Elected by DAO (Paid position) [CHANGED] Team Member - Offchain Labs (Waiving Payment) Team Member - Arbitrum Foundation (Waiving Payment) [REPOSITIONED] Team Member - ArbitrumDAO's OpCo (when operational)"
Supporting Response: Response #1 (51% similarity): "...would report their actions to the DAO with the utmost transparency possible."
Response #7 (44% similarity): "Given ADPC's track record, I am uncertain whether the Arbitrum Audit Program will be able to replicate or improve upon these ecosystem-building efforts."
Current section: "The committee will publish updates in regards to the program every 3 months with a total of 4 reports to be published."
Revised section: "The committee will publish monthly metrics including applications received, subsidies granted, projects launched, and funds allocated. Each decision will include published justification based on predefined criteria. [ADDED] A comprehensive review will be published quarterly with a total of 4 comprehensive reports to be published."
Supporting Response: Response #16 (40% similarity): "One concern that we have is that a team of a few might struggle to manage about 1.9 projects per week. Considering that audit subsidy needs are ongoing and permanent, the program could evolve from a one-year initiative into a continuous support model. The allocated budget in this proposal could be reviewed after an initial six-month phase and then reused as needed."
Current section: "We plan to run the subsidy program for 1 year, or until all funds are spent, with an appointed Arbitrum Audit committee. A subsidy will be offered as a grant or an investment in the project depending on size and long-term alignment."
Revised section: "We plan to run the subsidy program in three 4-month phases, each with review and improvement cycles, allowing the DAO to evaluate performance and make adjustments. The program structure is designed to evolve toward increasing DAO governance while maintaining service continuity. [REPLACED ONE-YEAR TIMEFRAME] A subsidy will be offered as a grant or an investment in the project depending on size and long-term alignment."
Supporting Response: Response #9 (44% similarity): "The Arbitrum Foundation may have better technical expertise to optimize the audit selection and facilitation process, but ADPC has been exceptionally strong at ecosystem growth, marketing, and building lasting relationships with protocols."
Response #20 (39% similarity): "ADPC has proven to be highly effective in other critical areas, particularly in maximizing Arbitrum's exposure among protocols, building strong relationships, and creating synergies that support protocol growth beyond just audits."