# Castle Delegate Communication Thread **URL:** \ **Category:** Delegate Statements\ **Tags:** delegation, governance, delegate-statements\ **Created:** [November 13, 2024, 4:18pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/castle-delegate-communication-thread/27522 "2024-11-13T16:18:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 7
**Author:** ![CastleCapital](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/castlecapital/32/16535_2.png) [@CastleCapital](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/CastleCapital)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2025, 12:33pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/castle-delegate-communication-thread/27522/7 "2025-02-10T12:33:35Z")
# **February 2025 votes** ## **Snapshot votings** # [AIP: Timeboost + Nova Fee Sweep](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/aip-timeboost-nova-fee-sweep/28247) **Vote: FOR** > [@AIP: Timeboost + Nova Fee Sweep](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/aip-timeboost-nova-fee-sweep/28247/44): > > We voted in favour of this proposal on Snapshot and have nothing additional to add. # [Request to Increase the Stylus Sprint Committee’s Budget](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/request-to-increase-the-stylus-sprint-committee-s-budget/28312) **Vote: FOR** > [@Request to Increase the Stylus Sprint Committee’s Budget](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/request-to-increase-the-stylus-sprint-committee-s-budget/28312/61): > > We are tentatively voting FOR the proposal on Snapshot but would appreciate it if @Entropy could clarify the questions raised in our earlier response. # [Arbitrum Growth Circles Event Proposal](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/arbitrum-growth-circles-event-proposal/28375) **Vote: AGAINST** > [@Arbitrum Growth Circles Event Proposal](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/arbitrum-growth-circles-event-proposal/28375/37): > > Hey @Farstar, thanks for putting this proposal together. After reviewing it and discussing it in your earlier Office Hours, we’ll be voting AGAINST on Snapshot for a couple of main reasons: The Events Category might not be the right fit We believe Arbitrum Growth Circles should complement the Arbitrum Ventures Initiative (AVI) rather than be separated as a standalone event. When viewed in isolation, the value proposition and ROI aren’t totally clear. However, as a program focused on nurturing… # [[CONSTITUTIONAL] AIP: ArbOS Version 40 Callisto](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/constitutional-aip-arbos-version-40-callisto/28436) **Vote: FOR** > [@\[CONSTITUTIONAL\] AIP: ArbOS Version 40 Callisto](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/constitutional-aip-arbos-version-40-callisto/28436/7): > > Overall, the Callisto upgrade appears to be a substantial step forward for Arbitrum in keeping up with Ethereum’s roadmap and we are in favour of it. Our only question @Arbitrum is whether developer tooling gaps and overall readiness have been accounted for to ensure a smooth transition amongst Arbitrum builders. # [Arbitrum Audit Program](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/arbitrum-audit-program/28368) **Vote: AGAINST** > [@Arbitrum Audit Program](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/arbitrum-audit-program/28368/46): > > We voted Against the proposal on Snapshot. Although we support the overall goal of the proposed program, we believe the Arbitrum Foundation (AF) has moved forward without adequately addressing existing concerns, particularly those raised by delegates around why the ADPC framework wasn’t fully utilized. These should have been addressed before the proposal goes to Snapshot. We believe these points should first be resolved in a way that satisfies everyone involved, as suggested by @KlausBrave: … ## **Tally votings** # [OpCo – A DAO-adjacent Entity for Strategy Execution](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/opco-a-dao-adjacent-entity-for-strategy-execution/27361) **Vote: FOR** > [@OpCo – A DAO-adjacent Entity for Strategy Execution](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/opco-a-dao-adjacent-entity-for-strategy-execution/27361/154): > > We maintain our earlier stance and have voted FOR OpCo on Tally # [Non-Constitutional: Stable Treasury Endowment Program 2.0](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-stable-treasury-endowment-program-2-0/26819) **Vote: FOR** > [@Non-Constitutional: Stable Treasury Endowment Program 2.0](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-stable-treasury-endowment-program-2-0/26819/117): > > Based on the earlier response received, Castle has decided to vote FOR the program on Tally # [[Non-Constitutional] [RFC] Arbitrum D.A.O. (Domain Allocator Offerings) Grant Program - Season 3](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-rfc-arbitrum-d-a-o-domain-allocator-offerings-grant-program-season-3/27584) **Vote: FOR** > [@\[Non-Constitutional\] \[RFC\] Arbitrum D.A.O. (Domain Allocator Offerings) Grant Program - Season 3](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-rfc-arbitrum-d-a-o-domain-allocator-offerings-grant-program-season-3/27584/46): > > Thanks for the detailed proposal, @JoJo. The reception and performance of Seasons 1 and 2 of the Domain Allocator Offerings definitely proven and delivered on its goals, and we are supportive and will vote to continue this program for Season 3 proposal with the 12-month Orbit track. On @pedrob’s suggestion of a vested ARB bonus tied to completing the 12-month term, we agree that a potential bonus can be allocated for DAs without reducing the monthly payments. Maybe it is something the DAO can … --- _[View the full topic](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/castle-delegate-communication-thread/27522)._