# AIP: Timeboost + Nova Fee Sweep **URL:** \ **Category:** Finalized AIPs\ **Created:** [January 22, 2025, 7:58pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/aip-timeboost-nova-fee-sweep/28247 "2025-01-22T19:58:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 81
**Author:** ![pedrob](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/pedrob/32/15561_2.png) [@pedrob](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/pedrob)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2025, 7:31pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/aip-timeboost-nova-fee-sweep/28247/81 "2025-03-24T19:31:16Z")
I’m voting FOR this proposal on tally, maintaining my previous votes for Timeboost and Nova Fee Sweep proposals > [@Constitutional AIP: Proposal to adopt Timeboost, a new transaction ordering policy](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/constitutional-aip-proposal-to-adopt-timeboost-a-new-transaction-ordering-policy/25167/48): > > I am voting in favor of this proposal on Snapshot. > > Thank you very much for the proposal and for all the work in developing Time Boost. I believe MEV capture is beneficial as long as it doesn’t affect the user experience or their economic interests, and it provides the DAO with an additional source of revenue beyond the usual fees. > > That said, MEV capture is still a topic whose legal implications remain somewhat unclear. There is no clear regulatory outlook, nor a solid stance from various jurisdictions on this matter. I expect continuous monitoring of the implementation of Time Boost and its impact on the chain and protocol performance. In particular, I want to echo the concerns raised by @Camelot. If there is a risk that the MEV captured by this new transaction auction model could impact users (and even harm them), there could be implications for performance, network trust, and legal considerations. > [@Constitutional AIP: Proposal to adopt Timeboost, a new transaction ordering policy](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/constitutional-aip-proposal-to-adopt-timeboost-a-new-transaction-ordering-policy/25167/106): > > 1. Prevents Front-running > > - Just like the Arbitrum sequencer today, the mempool will remain private, removing any possibility of frontrunning. There is no change in frontrunning protection; with Timeboost, users of Arbitrum cannot see other users’ pending transactions, preventing users from being front-run and frontrunning others. Understanding that the MEV being captured will come from arbitrage opportunities, it is still very important to maintain monitoring to analyze any unforeseen consequences. That’s why I’m also tagging the ARDC (cc @tamara @Atomist @Frisson @Juanrah) and kindly asking them 🙂 to coordinate with OCL and the Foundation to assess whether it makes sense to assign the available providers to conduct thorough monitoring and reporting on the impact of Time Boost during the first few months (at least for the duration of the current ARDC mandate) --- _[View the full topic](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/aip-timeboost-nova-fee-sweep/28247)._