Areta Delegate Thread

Governance Delegate Statements
,
1

Key Information

Please delegate to us on 0x8b37a5Af68D315cf5A64097D96621F64b5502a22

Areta
Areta2000×700 21.3 KB

Introduction

Areta Governance specializes in supporting DAOs and foundations to establish and grow decentralized governance structures. We develop tailored solutions in governance inception and optimization, ecosystem growth, and service provider selection. Our connected investment bank with deep strategic expertise, enables us to serve our partners holistically, rather than working in isolated governance silos.

We have had the privilege to work for some of the leading companies and DAOs in the crypto space (Safe, Uniswap, Aave and dYdX). Examples of our work include managing a larger Aave delegation, setting up key contribution initiatives for SafeDAO, leading the first cross-ecosystem growth initiative for Uniswap and Arbitrum, and crypto-native transactions like the first acquisition of Coingecko or the sale of Solscan to Etherscan.

As DAOs emerge from their infancy, their structures have proven powerful tools for enabling decentralisation and autonomy. We view a well-designed governance system as a critical enabler for decentralized projects to allow them to leverage decentralization as a strategic advantage, rather than an inconvenient necessity (where most of the market is currently at).

However, DAOs often encounter challenges in maintaining organisation, highlighted by governance issues such as contributor onboarding and delegate overload. These scenarios highlight areas where DAOs can improve by establishing structured processes for better collaboration and being open to further strengthening against inefficiencies.

Recognising the need for evolution, we focus on excellent DAO participation with robust, defensible analysis of proposals through a structured voting process while simultaneously applying our deep institutional knowledge and strategic governance expertise to offer proactive DAO governance solutions aimed at nurturing the ecosystem for the long term.

Delegate Motivation

As long-term supporters and contributors to Arbitrum DAO, we are well-versed with the Arbitrum ecosystem, its stakeholders, and many of the larger delegates.

Over the course of our involvement in Arbitrum DAO, we have led and supported the following initiatives with dedicated teams:

  1. Uniswap-Arbitrum Grants Program: We led the first cross-ecosystem growth initiative for Arbitrum and Uniswap by leading a 6-month grants program to allocate 1.1 million ARB in grants to projects exclusively advancing the Uniswap-Arbitrum ecosystem. [UAGP Hub]
  2. Service Provider Selection: As part of the Arbitrum DAO Procurement Committee (ADPC) we created a streamlined approach for the procurement of security service providers and set up a fund to subsidize security services for projects on Arbitrum.
  3. Arbitrum RWA Innovation Grants (RWAIG) Program: We established the RWAIG program to support the growth of Arbitrum’s RWA ecosystem, providing 300K ARB worth of grants to RWA products, research, and awareness initiatives building on Arbitrum. [RWAIG Hub]
  4. Arbitrum M&A: We were mandated to develop an M&A strategy for Arbitrum DAO that adds long-term value to the ecosystem. After an 8-week sprint, we produced an outcome report that resulted in two key initiatives being moved forward. [Forum Proposal; Outcome Report]

Core Tenets as Delegates

Areta’s core tenets as delegates are as follows:

  • 100% Voting Participation - we are deeply invested in the ecosystem and our goal is to meaningfully support its direction via thoughtful, educated governance decisions.
  • Independent and Impartial Voting - our voting is strictly informed by critical analysis and years of experience and is not based on bias or external influences.
  • Communication of Voting Rationale - we will communicate the rationale behind our votes through frequent updates to this thread, making us accountable to the community.

We will achieve these core tenets through our unique sources of value as follows:

Structured & Streamlined Voting Process
  • Our team lead adds new proposals to a shared tracker and assigns each incoming proposal to a specific member of the team.
  • For each proposal, we prepare a standard memo summarising the key issues, the black and white hat case (pros and cons), and a recommended decision with accompanying rationale.
  • Each proposal is then peer reviewed by another team member.
  • For complex proposals that require more discussion, we involve more members of the team as necessary to form a joint opinion.
  • We then publish our voting rationale externally on our public forum.

We always try to base our votes on sound, defensible rationale so that we are internally consistent and our voting track record stands up to external critique.

Ecosystem Growth and Expansion to Institutions

Leveraging the Areta network to promote and foster flourishing ecosystems across DAOs. Bringing unprecedented ties to a deep traditional network of corporates, strategics, and investors.

Governance Optimisation

Utilising our expertise to diagnose, analyse, correct, and enhance the effectiveness of DAO governance, ensuring streamlined operations and decision-making, while building up accountability structures.

Areas of Expertise

Having collaborated with industry leaders, Areta’s governance team offers a range of specialized services designed to support protocols and institutions in achieving their strategic goals, including:

  1. Governance Inception & Design: Set-up of key governance elements and structure, and build out tailored functions depending on ecosystem needs. Examples include: Contributor Program for Safe.
  2. Growth & Capital Allocation: Development of capital allocation and optimization strategy, along with innovative grant and contributor program design. Examples include: Uniswap-Arbitrum Grant Program, M&A Strategy for Arbitrum.
  3. DAO Strategic Operations: Design and operation of key executive functions, including leading key initiatives and filling gaps in DAO operations. Examples include: Service Provider Procurement for Arbitrum, RWA Strategy for multiple DAOs.
  4. Professional Delegation: Institutional-grade voting and decision-making, including creation of reporting material for key stakeholders. Examples include: Professional Delegation for Aave, Delegation for zkSync.

Selected Experiences

  • Contributor Efficiency System: Development of Safe DAO Contributor Efficiency System. Read more here.
  • Uniswap-Arbitrum Grant Program: Launch of Cross-Ecosystem Growth Initiative for Uniswap and Arbitrum. Read more here.
  • Operations Trustee: Trustee to dYdX’s Operations Trust. Read more here.
  • Aave Delegate: Incentivized Delegates for the Aave DAO. Read more here.
  • Wind-Down: Led the strategic wind-down of Gro DAO. Read more here.

Conflicts of Interest / Waiver of Liability

Areta currently does not have any material conflicts of interest. We agree to keep the Arbitrum community updated should any conflicts of interest arise. Our work in other DAOs is solely focused on supporting structural projects that are advancing the overall DAO space, are open-sourced across DAOs and will not influence any decision-making.

By delegating to Areta, you acknowledge and agree that Areta will participate on a best efforts basis and will not be liable for any form of damages related to participation in this DAO.

3 Likes
2

Proposal: Empowering Early Contributors: The community Arbiter Proposal 2.0

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate 125K ARB to retroactively reward 25 early contributors (i.e., Arbiters) to the Arbitrum ecosystem. We believe that recognising the past work of contributors is crucial to incentivising future contributions and aligning the interests of both contributors and the DAO. Furthermore, a list of these contributors containing an overview of their contributions has been shared with the community for transparency.

Proposal: Extend Tally Support for the Arbitrum DAO

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate $220K in ARB to Tally for the provision of extended technical and research support. We are voting in favour of this proposal because of Tally’s track record as a governance service provider to Arbitrum. The proposal details plans to improve the proposal process, such as highlighting transactions by the Security Council, enabling version tracking of proposals and embedding Forum posts/comments directly on Tally. Tally will also provide a dashboard for tracking delegate activity and conduct research into governance solutions for Arbitrum DAO such as partial delegation and shielded onchain voting. We believe that all these steps will culminate in improving Arbitrum governance, and we are therefore in support. We appreciate the diligent work and support from @Frisson and the rest of the Tally team in Arbitrum.

Proposal: Request for Continuation of the Arbitrum DDA Program Request

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate an additional $4M in ARB for Arbitrum grants via Dedicated Domain Allocation (DDA) by Questbook. The Arbitrum DDA program specializes in allocating rapid and micro grants to help grow the Arbitrum ecosystem across selected verticals. The previous round of the program has proven to be largely successful, approving $912K in grants to 60 projects spread across gaming, protocol ideas, dev tooling and education, community and events. On this basis, we are supporting the extension of this program. We especially believe in @jojo’s quality in steering the effort, having worked with him closely in the Uniswap-Arbitrum Grant program.

Proposal: Double-Down on STIP Success (STIP-Bridge)

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to introduce the STIP Bridge, a grant program aimed at providing 37.5M ARB in incentives to key protocols on Arbitrum, to enable Arbitrum maintain a competitive edge over other L2s. We support the effort to maintain Arbitrum’s market leadership and we believe that keeping these protocols committed to Arbitrum plays a huge role in that regard. We are however interested in receiving feedback on the performance and usage of STIP grants by the selected protocols.

Proposal: Catalyze Gaming Ecosystem Growth on Arbitrum

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate 200M ARB over the course of three years to expand Arbitrum’s web3 gaming ecosystem. We believe that gaming has a very strong potential to catalyze growth and adoption of Arbitrum. Currently, gaming accounts for 30% of the web3 market, with 2.1M daily unique active wallets [1]. While obviously a huge step for the Arbitrum ecosystem, we believe in @Djinn ‘s capabilities to steer this effort. There are still many unknowns and unsolved problems, but focusing our attention on solving them could potentially unlock significant value for the future.

Proposal: Constitutional AIP - Security Council Improvement Proposal

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to upgrade the security council structure by increasing the multisig threshold from 7/12 to 9/12, in order to maintain L2Beat’s “Stage 1” designation. We are supporting this proposal because increasing the threshold improves the decentralization and overall security of Arbitrum.

Proposal: ArbitrumDAO Contribution; Safeguarding Software Developers’ Rights

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate 1M ARB to Coin Center and DeFi Education Fund for the purpose of supporting policy, litigation and advocacy efforts for OSS and Software developers’ rights. We believe that supporting the work of Coin Center and DEF is important to Arbitrum and the overall web3 ecosystem in terms of lobbying efforts, interfacing with policymakers and engaging with regulatory authorities. These are the necessary steps that will drive widespread adoption of DeFi and the development of enabling legal frameworks that allow the industry thrive.

Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] - Subsidy Fund Proposal from the ADPC

Vote: ABSTAIN
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to establish a sub-committee for administering the Security Subsidy Fund. As an elected member of the Arbitrum DAO Procurement Committee (ADPC), we were responsible for establishing the Security Subsidy Fund. We are therefore abstaining from this vote in order to remain neutral.

Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Pilot Phase: Arbitrum Ventures Initiative

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to establish the pilot phase of the Arbitrum Venture Initiative (AVI) supporting the efforts of the AVI team with additional research. As we have been conducting a pilot phase for M&A (see outcome report here), we do see the merit in such an initiative. Our outcomes were developed in a way to be reusable for other capital allocation initiatives and do hope the AVI team can make use of these in their research. We hope to see tangible insights coming out of this that help the DAO making an educated decision on benefit of venture for Arbitrum.

Proposal: [Constitutional] ArbOS 31 “Bianca” (Stylus, RIP-7212 Support, Nova Fee Router)

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to activate ArbOS 31 on Arbitrum One and Arbitrum Nova. Notably, this upgrade will activate Arbitrum Stylus which introduces support for C++ and Rust applications on Arbitrum. Together, Rust and C++ account for >25% of programming language usage by developers. We believe introducing support for these languages will help onboard developers with diverse backgrounds to Arbitrum, further growing the ecosystem. We are therefore in support of this upgrade.

Proposal: Arbitrum Multi-Sig Support Service (MSS)

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to create a Multi-sig Support Service (MSS), comprising 12 DAO-elected multi-sig signers. These signers will be responsible for administering all DAO-funded multi-sigs. We support this proposal, because we see it as a positive step towards streamlining DAO operations by eliminating redundant multi-sig roles and their associated costs. We appreciate the work that has gone into this by @peperonnijoe discovering the uncontrolled spend on this in the DAO and believe this provides a sensible approach to fix this.

2 Likes
3

Proposal: [Aave DAO] LTIPP Grant Extension Request

Vote: FOR
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to extend Aave DAO’s LTIPP Grant for two months in order to enable it distribute the remaining 375K ARB to users. We are voting in support of this proposal as the LTIPP program has proven impactful for Aave, leading to significant increases in TVL and overall protocol usage. However, user incentives need to be distributed at a sustainable rate in order to ensure optimal outcomes, hence the need for the extension of time and this proposal.

Proposal: Arbitrum DAO Off-Site

Vote: Ranked choice vote
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to organize a dedicated off-site event for Arbitrum ecosystem stakeholders in Q4 2024, for the purpose of strategic alignment and problem-solving. We recognize the need for IRL events in the Arbitrum ecosystem and in the crypto space at large. As frequent IRL event attendees and conveners ourselves, we have experienced first-hand how physical meet-ups help to drive important discussions and kickstart key initiatives for DAOs, an example being the M&A initiative for Arbitrum DAO which was sparked by discussions with stakeholders at GovHack in Denver.

We are therefore generally in support of this proposal, with particular interest in it being a physical event. We have voted as per the proposal’s ranked choice voting format as follows below. However, we want to add the big caveat that we believe streamlining event efforts under one leader makes the most sense for the time being. Knowing that Klaus is also moving forward his work in offline events, and there is a broader Event strategy currently being worked on. Worst case for us, would be that different parties duplicate their efforts here and the DAO pays for it.

1st - IRL/conference/no scholarships

2nd - IRL/separate/scholarships

3rd - Abstain

4th - Drop idea and do nothing

5th - IRL/separate/no scholarships

6th - IRL/conference/scholarships

7th - Online event

Proposal: Entropy Advisors: Exclusively Working With Arbitrum DAO

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate $2.47 million to Entropy Advisors for the purpose of exclusively working for Arbitrum DAO for a year. With this proposal, Entropy aims to continue its work as long-term, exclusive contributors to Arbitrum DAO, supporting with key proposals and ecosystem growth initiatives. We believe the general inclination of the DAO towards working with professional service providers is a good thing, especially as it reflects decentralised, community-driven choice. Also, long-term, exclusive engagements may sometimes be necessary for increasing trust, productivity and achieving better outcomes, all of which are often impacted by chasing uncertain, short-term mandates. We are therefore generally in support of this proposal and we look forward to seeing how similar engagements can scale in the DAO. However, we see a big risk in how the arrangement is currently structured and Entropy being incentivized to ramp up their work and personnel as fast as possible to “unlock funds”. This is mildly concerning and represents an incentive flaw in our opinion. We trust Entropy to act in the best interest of the DAO, as we think highly of the team and the work they have contributed so far.

Proposal: Funds to bootstrap the first BoLD validator

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate 5,134 ETH to the Arbitrum Foundation to act as the first BOLD validator. As the first BOLD validator, the Arbitrum Foundation will perform key validator functions for the securing the Arbitrum One network including proposing assertions, posting bonds, and challenging and asserting bonds. These activities are required as part of the mechanisms for validating transactions on Arbitrum’s rollup contract layer, all of which is critical to fraud-proofing and maintaining Arbitrum’s network security. As these funds allocated by this proposal will help the Arbitrum Foundation to bootstrap this mechanism, we are voting in support.

Proposal: ARB Staking: Unlock ARB Utility and Align Governance

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate $200,000 to Tally for implementing ARB staking via The Tally Protocol. The Tally Protocol provides “Governance Staking” for Arbitrum DAO, which essentially entails providing ARB token holders with Governance Liquid Staked Tokens (stARB), allowing token holders to maintain their voting power and participate in governance while being able to fully exploit their tokens in DeFi, fixing the mismatch between economic token utility and governance token utility. Additionally, the Tally Protocol will enable the idle voting power in staked tokens to be redistributed to active delegates ensuring improved governance participation. Together with Tally, we have written extensively on the workings and potential implementation of this mechanism of redistributing idle voting power in DAOs, in an article titled “Metagovernance of Governance LSTs within DAOs”. We are voting in support of this proposal as we believe it has the potential to significantly unlock active governance for Arbitrum DAO.

Proposal: Delegate to Voter Enfranchisement Pool — Event Horizon

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate 7.32 million ARB to Event Horizon for the purpose of enfranchising voters with 7 million ARB through a metagovernance initiative that allows voters to pool their tokens into a larger voting pool (i.e., the 7 million ARB), enabling them to individually vote on what direction the entire pool votes. 325,000 ARB will be used to run the program and retroactively reward the Event Horizon team for managing this initiative across a one year period. We support this experimental approach to improving voting which is largely skewed in favour of a few delegates who hold large amounts of voting power. We are interested in seeing the continued growth of Arbitrum DAO and deviation from conventional strategies such as delegate races. However, we do believe it is a relatively expensive experiment and would like to fully understand the outcomes and value to the DAO afterwards.

4

Proposal: GovHack Devcon in Bangkok - Hack Humanity

Vote: FOR
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate $156,350 towards organising a GovHack event in Bangkok. For us, GovHack in Denver was an impactful event, sparking discussions that led to the Arbitrum M&A initiative. We believe another GovHack event would equally be impactful for Arbitrum DAO and we are in support of this proposal. We acknowledge that the proposal was withdrawn. Looking forward to the next event.

Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Funds to Bolster Foundation’s Strategic Partnerships Budget

Vote: FOR
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate 250 million ARB to enable the Arbitrum Foundation to foster key strategic partnerships. We are generally in support of funding strategic initiatives where there is a clear benefit to the Arbitrum ecosystem, even as competition in the DeFi/L2 ecosystem continues to stiffen. We are signalling our support and trust in the Arbitrum Foundation by voting in favour of this proposal. However, before this proposal goes to an off-chain vote, we would like to see more transparency and details around how this significant allocation (of $250m) will be utilised and over what time horizon this will be.

Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum DAO Delegate Incentive Program

Vote: FOR - DIP V1.5
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate ~$4.2 million for extending the ArbitrumDAO Delegate Incentive Program by 12 months. We are voting in support of the proposed v1.5 because of the heavier weight it places on the quality of delegate feedback. Similarly, we have observed the iterations and meaningful work that has gone into shaping this and appreciate it. As delegates, we are more interested in being able to provide in-depth feedback on proposals and discussions, and would prefer a set-up where delegates are specifically incentivised to continue do same. We acknowledge that measuring “quality” introduces considerable subjectivity to the mix, so we would like to see that evaluations are made in a consistent manner.

Proposal: Research on context and retention

Vote: FOR
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to grant TogetherCrew read access to Arbitrum’s public Discourse and Discord APIs for research purposes. The research will focus on analysing community behaviour, health and retention. We believe the findings from the research might prove useful for the community on various fronts, and since it comes at no cost to the DAO, we are in support of the proposal.

Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Whitelist Infura Nova Validator

Vote: FOR
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to whitelist Infura’s validator for Arbitrum Nova. As evidenced in the proposal, Infura has maintained consistently high API performances/uptimes on the Arbitrum Network (~99%). As part of the Data Availability Committee, they have already been playing a key role as validators for the Arbitrum Network, and thus it makes sense for them to be whitelisted as such. We are therefore voting in support of this proposal.

Proposal: [NON-CONSTITUTIONAL] Arbitrum DAO Procurement Committee: Phase II Proposal

Vote: ABSTAIN
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate 950,610 ARB as funding for Phase II of the Arbitrum DAO Procurement Committee (ADPC). The outcome report for Phase I of the ADPC can be found here. Key achievements from Phase I include:

  • Development of a procurement framework for Security-Oriented Service Providers;
  • Establishment of a $2.5 million Arbitrum DAO Security Subsidy Fund (SSF);
  • Development of a Means Test for evaluating projects that qualify for subsidies from the SSF;
  • Whitelisting of 8 Security Service Providers for Arbitrum DAO; and others.

The ADPC is now looking to extend its mandate to continue developing procurement frameworks for the DAO and manage the SSF among other things. As members of the ADPC we will be abstaining from voting on this proposal in order to remain neutral.

5

Proposal: An EIP-4834 powered daoURI for Arbitrum DAO

Vote: FOR
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to establish a daoURI for Arbitrum DAO. A daoURI will essentially store metadata about the DAO and serve as a public source of truth for all DAO-related information. The daoURI will follow the EIP-4824 metadata standard which currently enjoys widespread adoption from other major protocols and DAOs. Implementing this solution for Arbitrum DAO could potentially improve accessibility and transparency on DAO activities, and the fact that the implementation would be coming at no cost to the DAO is a plus. We will therefore be voting in support of this proposal.

Proposal: UPDATED - Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate 30 ETH to sponsor Attackathon, an event targeted at securing the Ethereum network through education, and security audits. As an ethereum-aligned ecosystem, we believe it is important for Arbitrum DAO to contribute to initiatives aimed at improving the security of the Ethereum network which Arbitrum leverages upon. We are voting in support of this proposal.

Proposal: Constitutional AIP - Extend Delay on L2Time Lock

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to extend Arbitrum’s L2 core timelock delay period from 3 days to 8 days. As far as DAO defence mechanisms go, there are little to no downsides to delaying the period between the passing of a vote and its execution, which is what this proposal seeks to do. For proposals that seek to alter and introduce changes to core protocol parameters, an execution delay period is necessary to ensure that the DAO can take remediating actions against malicious proposals before they are executed. One potential disadvantage though, of an extended delay period, is that making protocol updates will become slower and (theoretically) this can put the protocol at a strategic disadvantage when time is of the essence. However, this seems far-fetched and unlikely, and even so, is a minor setback that is significantly outweighed by the added security that a longer delay period provides. In addition to extending the core timelock, it might be worth it for the DAO to consider extending the treasury timelock, and contemplate other DAO defence mechanisms as well. As we believe this proposal improves the overall security of the DAO, we will be voting in support of it.

Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Funds to Bolster Foundation’s Strategic Partnerships Budget

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: We previously voted in support of this proposal during the off-chain vote (see our Rationale here). Our position remains unchanged, although we are still emphasising on the need for more transparency and detailed insights from the Arbitrum Foundation around the utilisation of the budget.

Proposal: ArbitrumDAO strategic “Off-site” (online) updated proposal

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: We previously expressed support for this proposal in the off-chain vote:

Although we would have preferred it to be an IRL event as opposed to an online one (as voted by the DAO), we will still be voting in support of the on-chain proposal. Given the cost this creates for people involved in the online offsite, we do hope for top facilitation and tangible value to come out of this.

Proposal: Enhancing Multichain Governance: Upgrading RARI Governance Token on Arbitrum

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to migrate the RARI token contract and governance from the Ethereum mainnet to Arbitrum. We are particularly excited about this proposal because it projects Arbitrum as a preferred L2 solution for cheaper and scalable transactions. We hope to see more of such migrations and similar developments for Arbitrum in the future. Worth noting that this proposal comes at no cost to the DAO. We will therefore be voting in support.

Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum DAO Delegate Incentive Program

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: We supported this proposal during the snapshot vote, and our view has remain unchanged. We will therefore be voting in support of the on-chain proposal.

Proposal: Fund the Stylus Sprint

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate 5,330,000 ARB towards providing grants for projects building with Arbitrum Stylus. We earlier expressed our support for the ArbOS 31 “Bianca” upgrade proposal which activated the Arbitrum Stylus upgrade.

We believed then that Arbitrum Stylus was valuable for improving inclusion, accessibility and growth for the Arbitrum ecosystem, and we still maintain this view now. By providing grants, this proposal will incentivise projects to build with Stylus, further reinforcing the impact of the upgrade. We view this as a positive add-on, and will therefore be voting in support.

Proposal: GCP Council Re-Confirmation Vote for John Kennedy and Tim Chang

Vote: FOR
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to reconfirm the election of John Kennedy as a member of the Gaming Catalyst Program (GCP) Council. We are voting in support of this proposal as we believe both John Kennedy and Tim Chang possess the relevant background for GCP Council membership. However, from a procedural standpoint, if the DAO ultimately has the responsibility reconfirming selected council members, it makes more sense for them to be directly elected by the DAO from the onset. In a situation where the DAO refuses to reconfirm a candidate, it means that the DAO will have to go through several reconfirmation processes for several candidates brought before it, until it settles on a preferred one. Although this is an unlikely possibility, it cannot possibly arise where the DAO is doing the election from the onset rather than a “reconfirmation”.

Proposal: (v2) Arbitrum Research & Development Collective

Vote: FOR
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to extend and fund the Arbitrum Research and Development Council (ARDC) for an additional six month term. We believe that the ARDC has proved its usefulness to the DAO during its first term, providing 40+ high quality research materials on DAO proposals and initiatives. It makes sense for the ARDC to continue its mandate. We are voting in support of the option for 1.73M USDC in funding and not a higher budget as we believe that it represents a reasonable cap for scope of deliverables without compromising on quality. Moreover, we believe that the Supervisory Council has already introduced an added layer of cost, which is in our view not adequately justified by the proposal as it fails to disclose why the DAO Advocate role could not be elevated to take on its function. Nevertheless, we are generally aligned with the proposal and will be voting in support.

1 Like
6

Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum Token Swap Pilot Program

Vote: AGAINST
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate 2,130,000 ARB to fund a token swap program for Arbitrum. The program will implement token swaps (i.e., exchange of native tokens) between Arbitrum DAO and other aligned projects as a means of facilitating bi-directional growth. While we very much value cross-ecosystem growth initiatives, having steered such between Arbitrum and other ecosystems, we would not be supporting this proposal in its current form. We believe specific design choices and aspects of the proposal need further refinement and detailed justifications including the lock-up period, the diversity and choice of projects, optimal swap size, etc.

7

This reflects our voting rationale for the proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum Token Swap Pilot Program.

8

Proposal: Adopt a Delegate Code of Conduct & Formalize Operations

Vote: FOR
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to introduce a Code of Conduct for Arbitrum DAO delegates. We believe this is a step in the right direction as it provides much-needed clarity on the expected behavior of delegates. Most of the guiding principles contained in the code are steps that many delegates, including us, have already been taking. However, codifying these rules is important especially for a DAO of Arbitrum’s size. We will therefore be voting in support of this proposal.

Proposal: Establishing a DAO Events Budget for 2025

Vote: ABSTAIN
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate 4m ARB (~$1.5m) as a budget for Arbitrum DAO events in 2025. The proposal sets out a DAO events strategy that focuses on delegate gatherings and ecosystem growth events, all aimed at streamlining DAO operations and fostering innovation and community engagement. As part of the Arbitrum DAO Procurement Committee (ADPC) we co-authored this proposal alongside entropy advisors and DisruptionJoe. Therefore, in order to maintain neutrality (and in adherence to the Arbitrum Delegates’ Code of Conduct), we will be abstaining from this vote.

Proposal: (V2) Arbitrum Research & Development Collective

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: We previously voted in support of this proposal during the snapshot vote and expressed our rationale here. We will still be voting in support in the on-chain vote.

Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Treasury Management v1.2

Vote: FOR
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal sets out a strategic framework for managing the DAO’s treasury and growth initiatives. It addresses issues such as service provider shortfalls, token volatility, and investment strategies. The split into Treasury and Growth management is welcome as it represents a combination of both a conservative approach to treasury management while allowing room for growth and investment. We would have liked to see more transparency around the constitution and selection of the treasury and growth management committees (TMC/GMCs), as well as making the process for holding these seats open. However, we believe there is a clear need for this proposal, and we will be voting in support.

Proposal: Restitution For Extensively Delayed ArbitrumDAO Minigrant Winners

Vote: AGAINST
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate ~$19k to provide restitution to Arbitrum ecosystem grant recipients who experienced a loss in the value of their grants due to ARB price fluctuations and operational delays. We will be voting against this proposal and our rationale for voting against this proposal is expressed below:

Proposal: [Non-consitutional] User Research: Why build on Arbitrum?

Vote: AGAINST
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate up to $58k towards conducting research on Arbitrum users. The research will be aimed at understanding why users build on Arbitrum and collecting feedback on future improvements. Although we recognize that the findings from the research may be potentially useful for the Arbitrum ecosystem, we will not be voting in support of this proposal:

  • The proposal does not provide clear KPIs for benchmarking the success of the research. This doesn’t help given that it is unclear what the research will specifically be used for.
  • We believe the research is within the scope of the ARDC and can be taken on by them, as they have seemed to confirm:

Proposal: Designing and operating the reporting and information function

Vote: AGAINST
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate ~$263k for the continuation of a Reporting and Information function for Arbitrum DAO. The reporting function aims to ensure DAO-wide transparency and accountability by providing tracking and reporting for DAO-funded initiatives. While we are supportive of the general direction of this proposal, we will not be supporting it in its current form due to several concerns which have also been echoed by other delegates:

  • We do not believe that the proposed budget for compensation is justified by the scope of work as outlined in the proposal.
  • The proposal did not allow sufficient time for discussion with respect to changes to the proposal that were made on the day of voting.

Overall, we believe that if the proposal is revisited and incorporates most of the feedback provided by delegates, it is one we may be willing to get behind. We appreciate the efforts of @AlexLumley for the extensive work that went ahead of this proposal and see Alex as a key contributor to the DAO that is the right person for the job and that we’d love to see continuing his efforts.

Proposal: Arbitrum D.A.O. Domain Allocator Offerings) Grant Program - Season 3

Vote: FOR
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to renew the Arbitrum Domain Allocator Offerings Grant Program (previously known as Questbook grant program). We have previously expressed support for previous seasons of the program as we believe it has proven to be an impactful initiative for the ecosystem.

Specifically, we would be voting for the program to be renewed with 5 domains because we see additional value in one of the newly proposed domains: Orbit Chains. Incentivizing growth and development on Orbit Chains is strategically important for the Arbitrum ecosystem and this tallies with ongoing effort and sentiments expressed by the Arbitrum Foundation. Overall, we would be happy to see the program renewed in any case and we will be voting in support.

Proposal: [NON-CONSTITUTIONAL] Arbitrum Onboarding V2: A Governance Bootcamp

Vote: FOR
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate ~$193k in ARB for the Onboarding Working Group to run another phase of the Arbitrum DAO Onboarding Program for seven months. We will be voting in support of the proposal. Below is our rationale / feedback on the proposal thread:

Proposal: ARDC (V2) Elections

Vote: FOR
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: Our vote for the ARDC (V2) elections across all categories are as follows:

Proposal: Unifying Arbitrum’s Mission, Vision, Purpose (MVP)

Vote: FOR
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to define a mission, vision and purpose (MVP) for Arbitrum DAO. From a strategic standpoint we believe defining a clear north-star for the DAO is key to streamlining focus and activities. We appreciate @EntropyAdvisors for their reception to iterative feedback throughout the discussion phase. We think the purpose, mission and vision as defined in the proposal is sufficiently wide enough to not limit the scope of the DAO’s activities and block evolution/growth. Yet, it is sufficiently clear and relevant enough to not come off as ambiguous and misleading. From our perspective, the MVP represents what should be the north-star for Arbitrum DAO. Seeing as we are aligned with this proposal, we will be voting in support.

Proposal: Partner with ETH Bucharest 2025

Vote: FOR - without POAP
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate up to $69k for Arbitrum DAO to sponsor ETH Bucharest 2025. The previous edition of the program appeared valuable to the Arbitrum ecosystem, featuring significant on-site representation as well as a workshop and hackathon focused on Arbitrum Stylus. We hope to see similar outcomes for the Arbitrum ecosystem in the next edition, as well as other events where Arbitrum DAO participates. Events remain a cornerstone of the DAO’s growth strategy with numerous initiatives underway in this area. For these reasons, we will be voting in support of this proposal. However, we will choose the budget-friendly option in our vote.

Proposal: OpCo – A DAO-adjacent Entity for Strategy Execution

Vote: FOR
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate 22m ARB to establish and manage an Operations Company (OpCo) for Arbitrum DAO over the next 30 months. The OpCo will serve as a legal entity to operationalize and execute the DAO’s strategic objectives, eliminating frictions arising from the unclear legal status of DAOs. As members of the Arbitrum M&A Working Group and ADPC, we have been uniquely exposed to understand the necessity of establishing an OpCo for the DAO. We have even recommended either of the creation of an OpCo or some kind of legal entity for the DAO in our past reports (here and here). The creation of an OpCo for the DAO will enable it effectively participate in strategically advantageous initiatives, such as M&A and others, while eliminating legal risks for DAO contributors. We view this proposal as a welcome development and will therefore be voting in support of the proposal.

Proposal: Arbitrum Hackathon Builder Continuation Program

Vote: AGAINST
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate ~$200k to fund a hackathon program for Arbitrum builders. @Danielo has done an amazing job putting this together and the proposal for RnDAO equally split the funding costs with Arbitrum DAO is highly welcome. However, to reecho the sentiment of other delegates, we are concerned about the quality of projects coming out of the hackathon and we do not believe that it justifies the very high ops cost and “venture support”. Further, while engaging in ecosystem development is always great for the DAO, we think the ROI here is very unclear and we want the DAO to only allocate resources towards funding initiatives that demonstrate clear value. We admire the intent of this proposal, but we are unable to support it in its current form and will therefore be voting against.

Proposal: Treasury Management V1.2

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This is the onchain proposal for this Snapshot vote that we voted in favour of according to our rationale here. Therefore, we will vote in support of this proposal as well.

9

Proposal: Non-Constitutional: Stable Treasury Endowment Program 2.0

Vote: MISSED
Type: Off-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to allocate 35m ARB to fund a second edition of the Stable Treasury Endowment Program (STEP). The program will serve the twin objective of diversifying the Arbitrum Treasury into stable, yield-bearing RWAs and supporting the growth of the Arbitrum RWA ecosystem. We believe diversification of the DAO treasury is an important objective as it cushions the effect of ARB volatility while productively investing DAO assets. Also, as program managers of the Arbitrum RWA Innovation Program, we have firsthand seen the need to strategically support the growth of RWA projects building on Arbitrum. The results of the first edition of STEP were commendable, generating ~$900k in yields for the treasury. We hope to see similar or better results in this second iteration. We are in support of this proposal, and though we unfortunately missed the snapshot vote, we will be voting in support during the on-chain vote.

Proposal: [Constitutional AIP] Activate Arbitrum BoLD + Infura Nova Validator Whitelist

Vote: FOR
Type: On-chain

Rationale: This proposal seeks to activate Arbitrum BoLD—a permissionless dispute resolution protocol for Arbitrum validators—and whitelist Infura’s Nova validator. We have previously signaled support for the adoption of Arbitrum BoLD, when we voted in support of allocating funds to bootstrap the Arbitrum Foundation as the first BoLD validator based on the rationale expressed here. Similarly, we previously voted FOR in the Snapshot vote to whitelist Infura’s Nova validator for the reasons we expressed here. Hence, we will be voting in support of this proposal.

Proposal: Arbitrum D.A.O. Season 3 Elections

Vote: Off-chain
Type: Multichoice

Rationale: Our vote for the Arbitrum D.A.O Season 3 elections across all categories are as follows:

After reviewing all candidates’ applications across all allocator domains, we voted in support of the above candidates because they seemed to possess the relevant skills and experience needed to effectively carry out their functions as domain allocators.

1 Like