# Castle Delegate Communication Thread

**URL:** <https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/castle-delegate-communication-thread/27522>\
**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:** 9

<div class="post-metadata">

**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:** [April 8, 2025, 11:38am UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/castle-delegate-communication-thread/27522/9 "2025-04-08T11:38:23Z")

</div>

# **April 2025 votes**

## **Snapshot votings**

# [[Non-constitutional][RFC] ARB Incentives: User Acquisition for dApps & Protocols](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-rfc-arb-incentives-user-acquisition-for-dapps-protocols/28291)

**Vote: AGAINST**

> [@\[Non-constitutional\]\[RFC\] ARB Incentives: User Acquisition for dApps & Protocols](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-rfc-arb-incentives-user-acquisition-for-dapps-protocols/28291/100):
>
> Hi @kamilgorski, we have voted Against the proposal on Snapshot. We still stand by our earlier response. [https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-rfc-arb-incentives-user-acquisition-for-dapps-protocols/28291/48?u=castlecapital](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-rfc-arb-incentives-user-acquisition-for-dapps-protocols/28291/48) The proposal in our point of view lacks proper consideration on how the program proposed can be extended further than the allocated budget. As we’ve mentioned before: • The budget is too large for an undetermined result. There’s a reason the DAO decided on…

# [OpCo – Oversight and Transparency Committee (OAT) Elections](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/opco-oversight-and-transparency-committee-oat-elections/28867)

**Vote: 100% Pedro**

> [@OpCo – Oversight and Transparency Committee (OAT) Elections](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/opco-oversight-and-transparency-committee-oat-elections/28867/29):
>
> The election of the OAT is one we have pondered for some time. It was honestly a difficult decision for us to make but we agree with @JoJo on the points he’s raised. Our initial preference was for the following 4 candidates: @ajwarner90@pedrob@Frisson@stonecoldpatHowever, taking into consideration that we’re not a large delegate, we’ve decided to take a slightly unorthodox approach. We took the strong assumption that AJ should and would be successfully voted in and that regardless of P…

# [TMC Proposed Allocations V2 – Stablecoin Strategy](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/tmc-proposed-allocations-v2-stablecoin-strategy/28786)

**Vote: YES, Deploy Stablecoins**

> [@TMC Proposed Allocations V2 -- Stablecoin Strategy](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/tmc-proposed-allocations-v2-stablecoin-strategy/28786/32):
>
> We voted Yes, Deploy Stablecoin Strategy. We think it makes sense for the DAO to deploy and obtain yield to generate an added revenue stream.

# [TMC Proposed Allocations V2 – ARB Strategy](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/tmc-proposed-allocations-v2-arb-strategy/28785)

**Vote: NO, Deploy Nothing**

## **Tally votings**

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/castle-delegate-communication-thread/27522)._