Rationale for Votes Occurring Aug 17th-31st
Snapshot
-
Should the DAO Default to Shielded Voting?
- Proposal: Link
- Vote: Elections Only
- Reasoning: We voted for shielded voting specifically “For Elections Only.” This is a sensitive matter and given that there is evidence that shielded voting reduces voter turnout, our view is that shielded votes should only be implemented for elections. In our experience, we have seen how politicscan lead some voters to change their vote at the 11th hour based on how others voted.
-
Proposal to Temporarily Extend Delegate Incentive System
- Proposal: Link
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: We voted FOR the Delegate Incentive Extension. This extension will allow ample time for feedback and iteration of DIPv1.1 while continuing to drive delegate contributions. We have been impressed with the job SeedGov has done in implementing this system and are satisfied with the results of DIPv1. The Karma scoring system has proved to be effective in tracking important delegate data-points. We are looking forward to seeing the final version of DIPv1.1.
-
Arbitrum DAO Offsite
- Proposal: Link
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: We voted FOR the Arbitrum DAO Off-site temperature check. Getting key stakeholders in the same room has proven to be beneficial for the DAO, as evidenced by the two GovHack initiatives. Our recommendation would be to ensure that the offsite is accessible to all delegates who are interested in participating.
-
daoURI for the ArbitrumDAO
- Proposal: Link
- Vote: Against
- Reasoning: We voted Against this proposal due to procedural reasons. We support the content of the proposal however we would like to see the proposing team follow the standard 7 day time-frame for comments and feedback in the forum, and then repost to snapshot.
-
Strategic Treasury Management on Arbitrum
- Proposal: Link
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: We voted For Strategic Treasury Management on Arbitrum. This proposal is a necessary step towards DAO sustainability, and we appreciate the proposed solution being implemented entirely onchain with Aera Protocol. The proposers: Karpatkey and Gauntlet, are strong organizations with a wide depth of experience in treasury and risk management. We trust in their ability to implement a successful treasury management solution for Arbitrum.
-
Should the DAO Create COI and Self Voting Policies?
- Proposal: Link
- Vote: FOR: Disclosure Policy & FOR: Responsible Voting Policy
- Reasoning: We voted For Disclosure Policy AND Responsible Voting Policy. We believe that requiring voters to disclose any potential conflicts of interest as well as voting for others, in addition to themselves, in an election, is a fair middle-ground. We would also like to echo L2Beat’s comment that the DAO needs an entity to enforce these self-declarative conflict of interest disclosures. The Foundation seems like a natural fit for the role.
-
Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship
- Proposal: Link
- Vote: Panda, Abstain, Unicorn, Against
- Reasoning: We voted for funding the Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship, and chose Panda Partners tier as our first option. Supporting the Ethereum ecosystem, specifically security, should be a top priority and it aligns with the Arbitrum Constitution. When weighing the options for sponsorship, we felt that the jump from Panda to Unicorn was not worth the added cost — Arbitrum would receive the best ROI with the Panda Partner tier. In the future, it would be advantageous for someone from the DAO to interface with hackathon/event proposers to negotiate pricing and perks. The ADPC or Entropy comes to mind as qualified representatives to manage these kinds of interactions.
Tally
-
Funds to bootstap the first BoLD validator
-
ARB Staking: Unlock ARB Utility and Align Governance
-
[Canceled] Delegate to Voter Enfranchisement Pool
- Proposal: Link
- Vote: Against
- Reasoning: We voted Against this proposal as the numbers were incorrectly stated.