- Proposal: Constitutional AIP: Proposal to adopt Timeboost, a new transaction ordering policy
- Voting type & platform: Offchain - Snapshot
- Vote: Collect bids in ETH
- Reasoning: We support this proposal, which has gone through a lot of research and development, and which significantly maximizes security by reducing several types of attacks that Arbitrum chains can experience while still using a transaction ordering FCFS type. Adopting Timeboost as the new transaction ordering policy for Arbitrum chains is a huge step forward in this area. We chose to collect bids in ETH because it leaves more open options for the future.
- Proposal: ArbitrumDAO Off-site
- Voting type & platform: Offchain - Snapshot
- Vote:
#1: Online event
#2: IRL/Conference/Scolarships
#3: IRL/Separate/Scolarships
#4: IRL/Conference/No Scolarships
#5: IRL/Separate/No Scolarships
#6: Abstain
#7: Drop idea and do nothing - Reasoning: We are all in favor of holding an online event as our main choice here on this proposal. We believe that IRL events are always valuable and help to connect people of the same environment, but our main vote is based on the simplicity of running such a reunion. We appreciate the idea behind this proposal as it tackles sporadic interactions and lack of direct engagement, however we feel that an online event is the best choice to not only get started with what the proposal aims to do, but also to measure the engagement of participants with this type of event. In addition, it is problematic to hold IRL events when members are from all over the world. However, we are not completely against the idea.
- Proposal: Terms of Tenure for STEP program manager
- Voting type & platform: Offchain - Snapshot
- Vote:
#1: 6 months from available funds
#2: Additional funds for 1 year
#3: Liquidation of RWAs and STEP
#4: New election at $86,581 per year
#5: Abstain - Reasoning: Our primary choice for this proposal is to approve only a 6-month contract from available funds, and our secondary choice in terms of importance is to approve additional funds for 1 year so that Steakhouse can complete their 1-year term. We appreciate the ratification of Steakhouse as STEP Program Manager, and so our choices are aimed at continuing the work that has been done so far. In that sense, dissolution of the RWAs or a new election is not something we would consider, nor would we abstain from this vote. In addition, as we have already pointed out in the forum, there should have been some kind of protection against possible losses for the candidate who was finally chosen to be the STEP Program Manager. This unaddressed factor cannot fall on the chosen candidate. Also, as indicated in our comment, given their role, we hope Steakhouse will implement measures to avoid these issues to ever arise again and so much more if these expenses are calculated in USD only.
- Proposal: GovHack Devcon in Bangkok - Hack Humanity
- Voting type & platform: Offchain - Snapshot
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: We voted in favor of this proposal because the precedents have been really well executed and the initiatives that have come out of it have had a high impact as expected. We have looked at the reports, opinions, and reviewed the results of these initiatives and see how positive these events are for the DAO. We see no reason to vote against such events if the results are valuable. Also, we know it has to do with where this event is being held, but we really appreciate the reduction in cost compared to previous events.
- Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Funds to Bolster Foundation’s Strategic Partnerships Budget
- Voting type & platform: Offchain - Snapshot
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: We voted FOR this proposal at the temp-check stage because we are convinced that the idea of this proposal is beneficial for the DAO, and from our understanding the reasons to increase the budget of the Strategic Partnerships program make sense. We are always in favor of proposals that aim to grow and continue to add value to the DAO by increasing its size and prominence among competitors, but we have some reservations that other delegates have also pointed out, such as the lack of detail on how these requested funds will be allocated once this motion passes. However, we are willing to change our vote if crucial information of this kind is not presented once this proposal reaches the on-chain voting stage. Our main concern is the amount of money being requested.
- Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum DAO Delegate Incentive Program
- Voting type & platform: Offchain - Snapshot
- Vote: For v1.5
- Reasoning: We voted for the V1.5 version of the program. We chose this option over v1.1 primarily because it takes into account every single piece of feedback provided by delegates, regardless of whether a proposal makes it into the snapshot or not. We feel this feature is fair to everyone who spends some of their time reading, analyzing, and providing feedback in order to contribute to the DAO, and this version of the DIP addresses that. V.1.5 clearly encourages delegates who are part of the DIP to add as much value as possible, as the rubric system, which is worth trying, aims for quality rather than quantity. On the one hand, we see this as a huge improvement that calls for a professionalization of the feedback provided. On the other hand, we feel that it will discourage possible spam in order to get participation points, which is also a positive aspect for the DAO. The continuation of this program is essential because of what it has meant so far. We strongly support not only the presented changes, but also its continuation and this innovative version of it.
- Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Whitelist Infura Nova Validator
- Voting type & platform: Offchain - Snapshot
- Vote: For - whitelist Infura Nova Validator
- Reasoning: We voted to whitelist Infura as a Nova validator. This was an oversight that needed to be fixed. It makes perfect sense to whitelist Infura as they have been validators all along. This brings more transparency and reliability to validators working with us.
- Proposal: Constitutional AIP - Extend Delay on L2Time Lock
- Voting type & platform: Onchain - Tally
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: Along with one of our recent previous votes (Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship), we also voted FOR this proposal, as improving security is always a priority for us. We strongly supported this proposal in its previous stage and we continue to do so now. We maintain the thoughts expressed in our previous rationale regarding this proposal
- Proposal: UPDATED - Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship
- Voting type & platform: Onchain - Tally
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: We reiterate our support for this proposal, as we did in its previous instance on Snapshot. As we have stated before on ocassion, we are always in favor of improving security and this proposal aims to do so. By supporting this proposal, its benefits will be reflected in our DAO as well, since Arbitrum directly depends on the security of the Ethereum protocol.
- Proposal: [NON-CONSTITUTIONAL] Arbitrum DAO Procurement Committee: Phase II Proposal
- Voting type & platform: Onchain - Tally
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: After careful consideration, we’ve decided to support this proposal, although we still share some concerns raised by the L2BEAT Governance Team, which need to be addressed for the ADPC to continue. On our side, we’re also concerned about the per-member budget, which seems excessive despite the demands of the role. However, we recognize the value and impressive results of the pilot phase and the innovative nature of the proposed work packages. While we were initially hesitant, we believe there’s no need to call for elections at this time, given that the term is only six months. We also appreciate the detailed breakdown of expenses and the ADPC’s commitment to ongoing transparency.
- Proposal: Research on context and retention
- Voting type & platform: Offchain - Snapshot
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: We definitely voted FOR this proposal. It is extremely beneficial for the DAO to have a tool like the proposed bot that will help those who need information about us, and thus help especially newcomers to join the DAO (and for the DAO to keep them and thus continue to grow). We also see this bot as a smart tool to avoid flooding the DAO with proposals that have already been discussed, by allowing anyone requesting data to see if a particular topic has ever been discussed or not. Although this can be done in the forum, this tool really helps since many debates sometimes happen outside, in this case in Discourse or Discord. We also appreciate the fact that the idea behind this proposal can be applied without spending money.
- Proposal: An EIP-4824 powered daoURI for Arbitrum DAO
- Voting type & platform: Offchain - Snapshot
- Vote: For - Use ENS txt records
- Reasoning: We voted FOR this proposal. As we mentioned earlier, we wanted to see this proposal re-published because we felt it had valuable potential that we would like to see applied to the DAO. Now that the procedural errors have been fixed, we stand by our decision to support this proposal. The reasons are simple: 1) It helps newcomers to get involved in the DAO and even existing and active members by having a single source of truth where all necessary data can be found all at once. 2) It costs nothing and greatly improves this need for information that everyone can have. 3) We found this request to be quite useful, as it has been adopted by several other DAOs and platforms, so it is reliable for us. Finally, in accordance with the general goal of this proposal (simplicity), we chose the option of ENS in txt records.
- Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Funds to Bolster Foundation’s Strategic Partnerships Budget
- Voting type & platform: Onchain - Tally
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: We again voted FOR this proposal in this new instance. As we had previously anticipated, we still hold the stated concern about the amount of money being requested and the lack of breakdown of those funds, yet we did not change our decision to support this proposal due to how beneficial we believe this is for the DAO.
- Proposal: Enhancing Multichain Governance: Upgrading RARI Governance Token on Arbitrum
- Voting type & platform: Onchain - Tally
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: We continue to be positive about this proposal and have supported it again on Tally. As we have said before, we see potential benefits for both communities. But especially for ours, because of what it means in terms of growth in particular. We understand the importance of being receptive to other protocols looking forward to joining us, and so we welcome this good precedent for future similar movements from other governances. We would also like to add that we appreciate the published review done by the interested party to bring more transparency to this motion.
- Proposal: ArbitrumDAO strategic “Off-site” (online) updated proposal
- Voting type & platform: Onchain - Tally
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: We voted FOR this proposal, as we did in the previous instance. We are pleased that there will be an online event and look forward to participating. As we indicated, this is our way when it comes to these types of proposals. In other words, we would do an online event first and then, if the idea progresses, we would start planning an IRL event. We are glad to see that this is the way it is going.
- Proposal: LTIPP Retroactive Community Funding Selections
- Voting type & platform: Offchain - Snapshot
- Vote: Do not fund
- Reasoning: We voted not to fund this proposal. While the value of the nominated community members is clear, the proposal needs a clearer breakdown of their specific contributions. Additionally, we don’t believe it’s our role to evaluate their impact, according to the LTIPP program framework, this responsibility falls to program managers and councils. These two reasons are sufficient to withhold support for the funding, despite the good intentions.
- Proposal: Establishing a DAO Events Budget for 2025
- Voting type & platform: Offchain - Snapshot
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: We are supportive of this proposal as it provides a fairly well thought out plan to get the most out of these events, however there are things that need to be either added or reorganized if this proposal goes to Tally that we believe should be considered as establishing measurable KPIs as other delegates have already indicated. We appreciate the fact that by adopting this proposal as it stands, the events proposals will move more quickly and in a more organized fashion. We are also in favor of holding such an event in LATAM and would be supportive and interested in its development if it ever happens. Lastly, we would like to point out that we are so in favor of this planning with time, considering the importance of holding these events and the impulses for our community that can come from them.
- Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum DAO Delegate Incentive Program
- Voting type & platform: Onchain - Tally
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: We voted FOR in the tally instance of this proposal. We saw how beneficial the previous DIP was in terms of getting more engagement from delegates with the DAO, so we are happy to support this renovated and improved version of it, and so much more considering that DIP V1.5 is the version that will be applied, as this was our choice in the snapshot. Keeping in mind the success of the previous DIP, we strongly believe that this version of the new DIP to be applied will bring some more commitment from the delegates than it has already gotten so far. The changes planned to be incorporated as well as the higher time-lapse of this program shows how effective having this program is for the DAO.
- Proposal: Fund the Stylus Sprint
- Voting type & platform: Onchain - Tally
- Vote: For
- Reasoning: We reaffirm our decision to support this proposal by voting FOR again. We think it is really worth trying to fund this sprint to get more and more teams involved in Stylus and building on it. We stand by our expressed thoughts on Stylus and the requested budget to get it up and running. We would also like to point out that we support the changes that have been made, and that we share some of the concerns already expressed about having 7 instead of 5 members in the evaluation committee, but we believe that the 2 new seats are members who have earned their places here considering their experience in the DAO grant programs. Also, this was announced well in advance, so no objections here.
- Proposals: GCP Council Re-Confirmation Vote for Tim Chang & GCP Council Re-Confirmation Vote for John Kennedy
- Voting type & platform: Offchain - Snapshot
- Vote: Abstain
- Reasoning: We decided to abstain from this polls since we are not comfortable with the GPC as a whole. We have been against this program from the beginning and remain so. In particular, we share the concerns raised in the GCP Fund Security Review & Oversight proposal. We acknowledge the backgrounds and resumes of the two candidates being put forward for reconfirmation, but we have still decided to abstain as the best option given the choices in these votes.
1 Like