Thank you to Entropy for putting forward a thoughtful and well-structured proposal. We support the overall intent to consolidate idle funds into yield-generating strategies managed under the ATMC, which is aligned with the DAO’s long-term goals of capital efficiency and sustainability as outlined in the MVP and Strategic Objectives initiatives. That said, we would like to suggest a few refinements and explore certain areas where clarity or adjustments could further strengthen the proposal’s alignment with broader community needs and operational flexibility.
First, we echo the suggestions from @cp0x and @jameskbh regarding the Events Budget. While we understand the challenges with its current structure, we suggest earmarking these funds within the ATMC rather than fully dissolving them. This approach would allow the funds to remain productive while preserving the DAO’s ability to support future DAO-native or regionally relevant event opportunities that may not align with the Foundation’s roadmap or qualify under the D.A.O. Grants Program. We also encourage the team to explore how liquidity can be maintained to ensure that these earmarked funds are accessible for time-sensitive opportunities, should they arise.
Second, as more capital is entrusted to the ATMC, we suggest increased transparency around how these funds will be allocated. While the proposal outlines the general stablecoin strategy, it would be beneficial to explore publishing a lightweight investment framework that includes expected yield ranges, preferred protocol characteristics, and risk parameters. This would help delegates better understand the trade-offs involved and improve overall oversight.
Third, while we recognize that the OAT plays a key role in oversight, we recommend clarifying how governance and reporting processes will apply to the newly allocated funds. This includes confirming that all fund deployments will be publicly disclosed in the ATMC’s forum thread and that quarterly reporting will be provided with performance data and strategy updates. These practices would support the DAO’s broader push for transparency and operational accountability.
Regarding the unused ADPC Security Subsidies, we suggest exploring whether any unallocated funds could be coordinated with the Arbitrum Foundation’s upcoming security or audit initiatives. If these initiatives are well-defined and mission-aligned, they may represent a more targeted use of capital than passive yield alone.
Finally, we support the point raised by @maxlomu regarding the need for a clearer breakdown of responsibilities between the ATMC, AAEs, and the Foundation. As operational roles expand, publishing a simple responsibility map would help DAO contributors and proposers understand where to engage and who to coordinate with across different verticals.
In summary, we support the spirit and intent of this proposal and appreciate the work done by Entropy and the ATMC. By incorporating the above suggestions and exploring these improvements, we believe the proposal can deliver even greater value to the DAO while upholding the principles of transparency, flexibility, and community alignment. We welcome any clarification or iteration from the proposers and would be happy to support further discussion to refine these ideas.