Will update with more information. This is an extension of the Savvy DAO Delegate Statement Thread. Savvy DAO - Delegate Communication Thread
0xA9cD2D7Fe90321BadD16ebf6b5dB7A6Be099ef2E
Voting FOR the Incentives DeTox proposal.
Voting Rationale for Supporting the [RFC] Incentives Detox Proposal
I voted in support of the Incentives Detox Proposal because it presents a thoughtful and necessary pause to evaluate and enhance Arbitrum’s incentive strategies. This proposal acknowledges the need to step back and thoroughly analyze the effectiveness of past programs before moving forward, which is essential for long-term ecosystem growth.
The suggested three-month break allows the DAO to consolidate data, identify what has worked, and refine future incentive programs to better align with our growth objectives. I particularly appreciate the emphasis on creating a dedicated working group that will include diverse voices from across the community. This collaborative approach is vital for designing a sustainable, data-driven incentives framework that truly supports the ecosystem.
Moreover, I believe that incentives should be viewed as a strategic tool for driving growth, not an end in themselves. The proposal rightly focuses on ensuring that future programs are tightly linked to clear growth metrics, making them more effective in achieving our broader objectives.
In summary, I voted in favor because this proposal is a crucial step towards creating a more impactful and sustainable incentives program for Arbitrum. It aligns incentives with our ecosystem’s growth goals and ensures we are using our resources wisely to build long-term value.
See Commenting Rationale Here: [RFC] Incentives Detox Proposal - #39 by AlexLumley
Voting AGAINST Transparency and Standardized Metrics for Orbit Chain.
Voting Rationale for “Transparency and Standardized Metrics for Orbit Chains on growthepie.xyz”
Support for the Proposal
- Enhanced Decision-Making:
• Rationale: Standardized data enhances strategic decision-making, crucial for planning liquidity programs and funding models.
• Impact: Enables the DAO to make informed decisions, improving transparency and operational efficiency.
- Economic Justification:
• Rationale: Anticipated productivity gains could offset implementation costs, suggesting the proposal could be self-financing.
• Impact: Potential long-term financial benefits through optimized resource allocation.
- Community and Ecosystem Growth:
• Rationale: Enhances visibility and understanding of the Orbit ecosystem, driving community engagement and development.
• Impact: Supports Arbitrum’s expansion and attracts new users and builders.
Concerns and Considerations
- Cost Analysis:
• Concern: Significant initial costs have raised questions about cost-effectiveness.
• Mitigation: Requires detailed financial justifications for each project phase.
- Implementation Feasibility:
• Concern: Challenges in integrating diverse Orbit Chains may be underestimated.
• Mitigation: Suggest a pilot phase to evaluate viability before full-scale execution.
- Redundancy and Competition:
• Concern: Potential overlap with other data platforms could lead to inefficiencies.
• Mitigation: Differentiate growthepie’s unique features and metrics that add value beyond existing solutions.
Conclusion
Voting in favor based on the proposal’s alignment with the DAO’s goals of enhancing transparency and decision-making. Addressing cost, technical feasibility, and differentiation is essential to maximize value and ensure resource efficiency.
See commenting rationale here: [Non-Constitutional] Transparency and Standardized Metrics for Orbit Chains on growthepie.xyz Allowing Data-Driven Decision Making - #17 by AlexLumley
Voting AGAINST ArbitrumDAO Governance Analytics Dashboard
See commenting rationale here: [RFC] ArbitrumDAO Governance Analytics Dashboard - #16 by AlexLumley
Voting Rationale for the [RFC] ArbitrumDAO Governance Analytics Dashboard Proposal
- Support for Enhanced Transparency
• Potential to significantly enhance transparency and decision-making within the ArbitrumDAO by providing deeper insights into governance activities through detailed analytics.
- Concerns Over Redundancy
• The proposed dashboard might overlap with existing tools, particularly the Karma dashboard, potentially leading to redundancy and complicating the governance landscape.
- Recommendations for Integration
• I recommend integrating the dashboard with other initiatives or focusing on unique metrics not currently covered by existing tools to ensure it adds distinct value to the DAO.
- Community Engagement and Feedback
• The proposal team’s active engagement in addressing community concerns and willingness to adapt based on feedback is positively viewed, emphasizing the potential for the dashboard to evolve with the DAO’s needs.
Proposal: ARB Staking - Unlock ARB Utility and Align Governance
Voting Decision: Yes
Rationale:
This proposal is a significant step forward in increasing the utility of the ARB token and securing the Arbitrum ecosystem. By enabling ARB staking, the proposal allows token holders to participate more actively in governance while also making ARB compatible with DeFi through the liquid staked ARB token (stARB).
The proposal also addresses governance security by incentivizing participation, which reduces the risk of governance attacks on the DAO treasury. The modular design of the staking system and the integration of Karma ensure flexibility and future adaptability, which are crucial for the system’s sustainability.
The budget is carefully planned, with resources allocated for smart contract development, integration, and auditing, ensuring a robust implementation. The parallel workstreams demonstrate a commitment to community engagement and will help align the implementation with the broader interests of the Arbitrum community.
Vote: Yes
See commenting rationale here: ARB Staking: Unlock ARB Utility and Align Governance - #97 by AlexLumley
VOTING RATIONALE:
Voting Rationale:
I voted against this proposal because, while I understand the potential benefits of shielded voting in certain scenarios, I believe that it may undermine the transparency and engagement that are crucial to the effective functioning of our DAO.
-
Transparency: Public voting allows for real-time accountability, enabling the community to see how delegates are voting and why. This transparency is essential for maintaining trust and ensuring that decisions reflect the will of the broader community.
-
Participation Concerns: There is a significant risk that shielded voting could reduce overall participation, as evidenced by the Aave DAO experiment. Lower participation could weaken the legitimacy of our decisions and reduce the diversity of opinions represented in the final vote.
-
Importance of Signaling: Public voting provides valuable signals to the community, helping voters make informed decisions based on the rationale of others. Shielded voting could suppress this important discourse, leading to less informed voting and potentially poorer decision outcomes.
-
Flexibility over Default: I believe that while shielded voting might be useful in specific cases, such as highly politicized elections, it should not be the default setting for all Snapshot votes. Instead, we should maintain flexibility and allow proposal authors to decide when shielded voting is appropriate.
In summary, while shielded voting has its merits, I believe the risks associated with its broad implementation outweigh the potential benefits, leading me to vote against this proposal.
See Commenting Rationale: Should the DAO Default to using Shielded Voting for Snapshot Votes? - #60 by AlexLumley
VOTING RATIONALE.
Voting Rationale Summary
Support:
• Governance Continuity: Ensures ongoing delegate participation during system updates.
• Economic Adaptability: Adjusts compensation to current market conditions, maintaining fair delegate support.
• Smooth Transition to DIS v1.1: Provides a buffer for developing and refining the new system.
Concerns:
• Financial Watchfulness: Requires monitoring to prevent fund depletion.
• Precedent for Future Costs: Increases could influence expectations for future administrative expenses.
Conclusion:
This proposal is necessary to keep governance effective and responsive, balancing immediate delegate support needs with careful financial and strategic planning.
See Voting rationale here: Proposal to Temporary Extend Delegate Incentive System. - #43 by AlexLumley
Voting FOR the Arb Staking proposal by @Frisson.
I stand by my Voting Rationale here: Alex Lumley (Savvy DAO) Delegate Communication Thread - #5 by AlexLumley
And my commenting Rationale here:
This is a platform for Arbitrum to improve two major issues plaguing the DAO:
- ARB utility
- Voter engagement.
Voted FOR the Delegate to Voter Enfranchisement Pool — Event Horizon
Type: Tally
This proposal allows potential delegates to onboard in to the DAO using a structure and a sub-dao where they can learn and experiment.
I’m especially interested in how they can work with universities to teach and onboard new governance participants. I expect them to output new contributors and participants to the DAO.
I’m excited for this experiment.
See Commenting Rationale here: Delegate to a public access, public good citizen enfranchisement pool through Event Horizon - #102 by AlexLumley
Vote: FOR
Type: Snapshot
Proposal link: Snapshot
Commenting on Proposal Link: Delegate to a public access, public good citizen enfranchisement pool through Event Horizon - #126 by AlexLumley
=== VOTING RATIONALE: ===
It is important we save costs where we can. This update to the proposal was necessary to save the DAO much larger costs. I’m also a fan of how they validated this with snapshot. We ended up saving over 100K in ARB!
VOTED: FOR
Proposal Link:
Type: Tally
Voting For the ARB Staking proposal on Tally.
I maintain what I said in my Snapshot Voting Rationale:
This proposal is a significant step forward in increasing the utility of the ARB token and securing the Arbitrum ecosystem. By enabling ARB staking, the proposal allows token holders to participate more actively in governance while also making ARB compatible with DeFi through the liquid staked ARB token (stARB).
The proposal also addresses governance security by incentivizing participation, which reduces the risk of governance attacks on the DAO treasury. The modular design of the staking system and the integration of Karma ensure flexibility and future adaptability, which are crucial for the system’s sustainability.
The budget is carefully planned, with resources allocated for smart contract development, integration, and auditing, ensuring a robust implementation. The parallel workstreams demonstrate a commitment to community engagement and will help align the implementation with the broader interests of the Arbitrum community.
Vote: FOR
Type: Tally
Proposal link: Tally | Arbitrum | Funds to bootstrap the first BoLD validator
VOTING RATIONALE:
Voted in For this proposal on Tally and on Snapshot.
Glad that the first BoLD validator is a trusted party like the ARB FND especially one that is working early. We are setting the stage for things to move forward.
See my Commenting On Proposal here: AIP: Funds to bootstrap the first BoLD validator - #47 by AlexLumley
Vote: FOR
Type: Snapshot
Proposal link: [Constitutional] Extend Delay on L2Time Lock
Commenting on Proposal Link:
=== VOTING RATIONALE: ===
We support the proposal to extend the L2 Core TimeLock delay from 3 days to 8 days. This change provides critical security improvements by giving the Security Council more time to respond to potentially malicious proposals. The benefits of enhancing security far outweigh the minor tradeoff of a slightly longer delay. By approving this proposal, we help strengthen the safety and reliability of the Arbitrum ecosystem, making it a smart step towards long-term growth and stability.
Vote: ABSTAIN
Type: Snapshot
Proposal link: Snapshot
Commenting on Proposal Link: STIP-Bridge Operational Budget - #33 by AlexLumley
=== VOTING RATIONALE: ===
As the proposer of this vote I am voting abstain on this.
Just noting that I also did not add my Voting on Rationale because I was the author of the proposal.
Vote: FOR
Type and Proposal Link Snapshot - Arbitrum DAO Procurement Committee: Phase II
Commenting on Proposal Link: Arbitrum DAO Procurement Committee: Phase II Proposal - #82 by AlexLumley
=== VOTING RATIONALE: ===
We are voting FOR this proposal to extend the ADPC’s tenure into Phase II due to their strong performance in Phase I. The team’s transparency and commitment to the procurement process align well with the values of the DAO, and we believe they are well-positioned to continue delivering value. While concerns have been raised about the lack of re-election and the broad budget request, we feel that the continuity of the current team is critical to maintaining progress. A detailed breakdown of their budget has been provided, and adjustments made between Snapshot and Tally voting further clarify their approach.
1 Like
Vote: AGAINST
Type and Proposal Link: Snapshot –> Pyth Network Arbitrum LTIPP Extension Request
Commenting on Proposal Link: [RFC] Pyth Network Arbitrum LTIPP Extension Request - #47 by AlexLumley
=== VOTING RATIONALE: ===
We are voting AGAINST this proposal as it conflicts with the recently approved Incentives Detox, which aims to pause incentives to assess and improve the overall program. Allowing this extension could undermine the goals of the detox period and create an uneven playing field by granting special considerations to one project over others. Furthermore, this proposal lacks a clear explanation for how the remaining funds will be used effectively, which raises concerns about setting a precedent for future requests. Maintaining the integrity of our incentive program and adhering to the DAO’s decisions is crucial at this time.
Vote: FOR
Type and Proposal Link: Snapshot –> Rari Governance Transition to Arbitrum
Commenting on Proposal Link: Enhancing Multichain Governance: Upgrading RARI Governance Token on Arbitrum - #48 by AlexLumley
=== VOTING RATIONALE: ===
We are voting FOR this proposal as it has no direct costs to the DAO and offers substantial benefits to the Arbitrum ecosystem. By transitioning Rari governance to Arbitrum, the proposal reduces gas fees, enhances user experience, and potentially increases participation in governance activities. This initiative strengthens both Rari’s and Arbitrum’s positions in Layer 2 innovation. While there are concerns around migration incentives for current Rari token holders, the long-term benefits of this proposal outweigh the challenges, making it a strategic move for Arbitrum’s growth.
Vote: FOR
Type and Proposal Link: Snapshot –> Synthetix LTIP Grant Extension Request
Commenting on Proposal Link: [RFC] Synthetix LTIP Grant Extension Request - #42 by AlexLumley
=== VOTING RATIONALE: ===
We are voting FOR this proposal as it supports the continued growth and incentivization of the Synthetix protocol, a key player in the Arbitrum ecosystem. While concerns about fairness and adherence to the Incentives Detox are valid, this proposal addresses immediate needs that will help Synthetix sustain its progress. However, we recommend that future incentive programs include contingency plans for delays to avoid the need for ad-hoc extensions and ensure fairness for all participating projects.
Vote: FOR
Type and Proposal Link: Snapshot –> Fund the Stylus Sprint
Commenting on Proposal Link: [RFC] Fund The Stylus Sprint - #52 by AlexLumley
=== VOTING RATIONALE: ===
We are voting FOR the Stylus Sprint proposal as it offers substantial value to the Arbitrum ecosystem by attracting developers from other ecosystems to build on Stylus. This initiative not only reduces barriers for developers but also enhances the long-term growth potential of Arbitrum. With thoughtful program structure, milestone-based funding, and open-source requirements, the proposal mitigates risks while maximizing community benefits. Addressing feedback on timelines, marketing, and the multisig structure will further strengthen this initiative and ensure its successful implementation.
Vote: FOR
Type and Proposal Link: Snapshot –> Aave DAO LTIPP Grant Extension Request
Commenting on Proposal Link: RFC: Aave DAO LTIPP Grant Extension Request - #43 by AlexLumley
=== VOTING RATIONALE: ===
We are voting FOR this proposal because Aave’s LTIPP extension request does not involve any additional budget, but allows Aave more time to distribute its remaining incentives, ensuring that the ARB tokens are fully utilized. As a leading DeFi protocol, Aave has a significant impact on the Arbitrum ecosystem, and supporting its growth will further enhance liquidity and transactions within the ecosystem. While the Incentives Detox is important, this extension supports ongoing initiatives without creating new expenses, making it a pragmatic decision to drive continued value.