Rationale for Votes Occuring in June:
Snapshot Votes
-
Subcommittee for Security Services Cohort
- Proposal: Link
- Vote: Against
- Reasoning: We voted AGAINST the Subcommittee for Security Services Cohort. We believe there is no need for another committee at this time, as the ADPC should be equipped to handle the overseeing the administration and selection process for security services subsidies. However, we remain open to re-evaluating our position if the ADPC provides more clear reasoning around why this subcommittee is necessary.
-
AIP: Nova Fee Router ARBos
- Proposal: Link
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: We voted FOR on the Nova Fee Router AIP to permissionlessly send funds from Nova to the Arbitrum DAO Treasury on Arbitrum One. We support technical changes that improve the operational efficiency of the DAO and simplify financial operations.
-
Activate Stylus and NextGen Web Assembly Smart Contracts
- Proposal: Link
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: We voted FOR as Stylus is an exciting technical improvement that will most notably increase accessibility and reduce costs for developers building on Arbitrum. We support pioneering proposals like this one, that strengthen Arbitrum’s market leadership.
-
Account Abstraction Support RIP-7212
- Proposal: Link
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: We voted FOR support enhancing Account Abstraction (AA) through RIP-7212, the introduction of new Smart Wallets. We support technical improvements that improve security for users and are obviously aligned with the values specified in Arbitrum DAO’s Constitution.
-
Election of STEP Program Manager
- Proposal: Link
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: We voted for Avantgarde due to their crypto native expertise in treasury management. We have enjoyed working with them in Uniswap DAO and would like to support them in establishing a footprint in Arbitrum.
-
AVI
- Proposal: Link
- Vote: Against
- Reasoning: We voted AGAINST because this proposal lacks a clear problem statement and actionable solution. It also overlaps with existing initiatives in the DAO such as the Gaming Catalyst Proposal (GCP) and M&A Pilot. Although we do see the value in a Venture Initiative for Arbitrum, we do not support providers who ask the DAO for funding to work on thesis development and would prefer providers come to the DAO with an initial thesis.
-
AIP BoLD - permissionless validation for Arbitrum
-
Proposal 1: Link
-
Vote: For
-
Reasoning: We voted FOR this proposal as it aligns with Arbitrum’s goals of decentralization (via permissionless validation) and security (via mitigating the risk of delay attacks).
Additionally, as we commented in the forum here, we think it’s important for the DAO to have mechanisms in place to ensure that it makes an educated decision in how to spend confiscated funds from a malicious actor.
-
-
Proposals 2 &3: AIP: Funds to bootstrap the first BoLD validator - Bond sentiment & Operational cost sentiment
- Proposal 2: Link
- Proposal 3: Link
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: We voted FOR these proposal as we support introducing an economic incentive mechanism to grow the validator set. Arbitrum Foundation is a great fit to be the first active proposer on BoLD. With that said, although we understand that only one honest party is required in BoLD to protect the integrity and liveness of the system, we would like to explore future incentive mechanisms for additional parties to also become proposers.
-
Pilot Stage - Treasury Backed Vaults R&D
- Proposal: Link
- Vote: Against
- Reasoning: We voted Against Treasury Backed Vaults R&D Proposal. Although we think it is an interesting idea, we would like to first see a revised proposal that includes the community’s feedback, the risks that TBV’s create for the DAO, and a lower cost.
-
Infinite Launchpad
- Proposal: Link
- Vote: Against
- Reasoning: We have voted AGAINST the Infinite Launchpad Proposal. While we support enhancing the venture ecosystem in Arbitrum, this proposal lacks clear deliverables and the cost is excessive. Furthermore, the DAO doesn’t have an operational structure in place yet to capture upside from the VC investments that will be made.
-
ArbitrumHub Evolution: The Next Step in Streamlining Information Access and Raising Awareness for Arbitrum DAO
- Proposal: Link
- Vote: Against
- Reasoning We have voted AGAINST this proposal. Although we believe it’s important to create a repository of information to track activity across the DAO, the budget for this initiative is egregiously high, especially considering that the content presented is high-level.
-
Multisig Support Service (MSS) Elections
- Proposal: Link
- Vote: Abstain
- Reasoning: We voted to ABSTAIN by voting equally for all candidates. This is to avoid a conflict of interest while running for the MSS position.
Tally Votes
-
Front-end interface to force transaction inclusion during sequencer downtime
-
Pilot Phase: M&A for Arbitrum DAO
-
GCP
-
Constitutional AIP - Security Council Improvement Proposal
-
ArbitrumDAO Contribution; Safeguarding Software Developers’ Rights
-
Kwenta x Perennial: Arbitrum Onboarding Incentives