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:
- ARDC (V2) Security Election - ABSTAIN
- ARDC (V2) Supervisory Council Election
- Frisson (Comm Role)
- Entropy Advisors + Tamara (Op Role)
- ARDC (V2) Risk Election
- Vending Machine
- Nethermind
- ARDC (V2) Research Election
- PYOR Research
- Llama Research & Castle Capital
- Blockworks Advisory
- Messari
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.