Vote: FOR Type: On-chain Rationale : We previously expressed support for this proposal following the snapshot vote here . We will also be voting in support for the on-chain vote.
Vote: FOR Type: Off-chain Rationale : We have expressed support for the Nova fee sweep action on the forum proposal (below) and thus will be voting FOR.
Vote: On-chain Type: FOR Rationale : This proposal seeks to establish an OpCo for Arbitrum DAO as a legal entity structure for executing strategic DAO objectives. We have earlier expressed our support for this proposal on the forum post (see below) and during the Snapshot vote. We will be voting FOR on the on-chain vote.
This is a proposal we’re excited to get behind as it proceeds to onchain vote. As members of the ADPC and having led the M&A work for the DAO, we have seen the necessity of establishing an OpCo for the DAO on the ground. 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 ).
We do believe that the OpCo has a chance to enable the DAO to do strategic initiatives it couldn’t do before, e.g., Venture, M&A, while addressing fragmentation in initiative execution and lack of clear ownership for critical programs.
While timelines on this work have not been met so far (the initial target was for the OpCo to be live at DevCon 2024), we do see and appreciate the work that has gone into it. In order to ensure a smooth landing, we feel it is important to establish clear processes from the onset regarding the OpCo formation and to conduct more handholding with key parties involved in the target OpCo. One key area to look at is the relationship between OpCo and existing service providers. We need to move from theory to practice rather sooner than later, i.e., let’s get service providers / contributors / and anyone else in a room to discuss the granularities. Denver might be a good occasion for this. There should be transparent processes around transitioning existing contracts, defining specific criteria for determining what initiatives should be executed through OpCo and working with existing DAO groups to ensure fair competition, efficient procurement and preventing vendor lock-in.
Thanks to @EntropyAdvisors , @dk3 , for the longstanding efforts towards this initiative. We will be voting in support during the onchain vote.
Vote: Off-chain Type: FOR Rationale : We’ve expressed our reasons for supporting this proposal in our comment on the forum proposal below:
Excited to see the overwhelming interest from builders in the Stylus Sprint program. When we voted in support of the program, we did so because we believed that Stylus was going to be a driver of growth for the Arbitrum ecosystem. What we’ve seen in terms of program traction so far, seems to confirm this.
Given the unique advantage that Stylus brings to Arbitrum, as well as the quality of applicants, we think it’s in the interest of the DAO to capitalize on this by increasing the budget to support more projects.
We understand concerns regarding setting a wrong precedent around the utilization / allocation of grants budgets. However, we view this a strategic opportunity for the DAO to capitalize on. It’s important for the DAO to remain flexible under these circumstances.
Finally, we do not believe it is the best approach to ask applicants to bring their grant requests directly to the DAO. This will result in duplication of efforts (applications have already been reviewed) and additional delays. It also potentially sets another wrong precedent of grantees bypassing specially designated funding programs to seek direct funding from the DAO—defeating the purpose of program itself.
Vote: On-chain Type: FOR Rationale : We will be voting in support of this onchain proposal. We voted in support of the off-chain proposal and we expressed our rationale here .