[Constitutional] AIP: Constitutional Quorum Threshold Reduction

[maxlomu]

gm, voted FOR on Tally as per previous commment.

[Euphoria]

The following reflects the views of the Lampros DAO governance team, composed of Chain_L (@Blueweb) and @Euphoria, based on our combined research, analysis, and ideation.

We are voting FOR this proposal in the Tally voting.

The current 5% quorum is tough to reach with today’s voter turnout and larger ARB supply. Dropping it slightly to 4.5% keeps constitutional proposals from getting stuck for no good reason.

We see this as a simple, safe fix that costs nothing and avoids governance deadlock. As mentioned before, we prefer a clear review after a specific time, be it six months, so this does not stay fixed forever.

While this helps for now, the main goal should still be to improve turnout so higher quorums are easy to meet in future votes.

[dragonawr]

I will be voting FOR this proposal on Tally once more per the reasoning described in my previous post.

[Tane]

We vote for this proposal, keeping our stance from the snapshot vote.

We see and agree with this as a temporary solution, and believe the need for more fundamental solution for higher and broader voter participation.

[jameskbh]

I voted FOR on this proposal on Tally. The reasoning remains the same.

[Griff]

Voting FOR

As mentioned in a previous comment, lowering the threshold doesn’t mean we’re giving up on engagement, it just means we’re not wasting valuable contributor time on cat herding votes when that energy could be spent on more impactful work.

[krst]

The following reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst, @Sinkas, and @Manugotsuka, and it’s based on their combined research, fact-checking, and ideation.

We are voting FOR the proposal.

We previously supported the proposal during the temp check vote, and we also expressed our views on alternative solutions. The proposal hasn’t changed, and neither has our stance.

After confirming that the proposal’s calldata only introduces a 0.5% reduction in quorum and nothing else, we cast our vote in favor.

[ocandocrypto]

As in @web3citizenxyz representation, voting in favor. Below the rationale:

Web3 Citizen Delegate Communication Thread

Tally: Constitutional Quorum Threshold Reduction We’re voting in favor. No further discussion in the last month has changed our rationale since Snapshot. See below our previous reasoning. Reducing the quorum is the simplest solution at the moment to guarantee a better viability for governance of the protocol. Hopefully we can work towards a better, and stable solution in the long term.

[paulofonseca]

voting AGAINST on the current onchain vote because this increases the chances of a governance attack on our network.

[0x_ultra]

Voting in favor on Tally for the same reasons I previously mentioned during the discussions on the forum. You can find my comment here: [Constitutional] AIP: Constitutional Quorum Threshold Reduction - #34 by 0x_ultra

[SEEDGov]

After consideration, the @SEEDgov delegation decided to vote FOR on this proposal at the Tally Vote.

Rationale

We sustain our initial position and believe it is necessary to restart discussions to find a long-term solution to address the lack of participation and incentives to redelegate.

@SEEDGov

Rationale

We agree with L2B and other delegates: considering the unlock rate, despite this modification in a short time, we will reach the actual required quorum levels, so a long-term solution is necessary.
We would like to know AF’s opinion (@arbitrum) about potential alternatives for solving the lack of participation (both from delegated and undelegated ARB ), and especially the lack of incentives to delegate VP to active delegates in the long term.
From our POV, staking aligned with involvement in governance for obtaining rewards is still the most viable alternative, even though we are unaware of the source of resources to be used to fund it
Now, we are invoking the AF because we understand that nowadays this process needs an entity/contributor that owns it. Right now, we all agree that a long-term solution is necessary, but this proposal never establishes an action plan to follow, or at least, to start to work on a permanent fix.

[AlexLumley]

I voted FOR because our governance woes aren’t just about a 0.5% quorum shift—they’re symptoms of deeper engagement challenges. Lowering quorum to 4.5% will curb the all-too-common “failed vote” scenario and save our community time and gas fees. I support piloting cupojoseph’s concrete proposal to allocate ~22 M ARB from the treasury as direct rewards for active delegates and high-impact proposals. By combining the quorum reduction with this targeted rewards program—and committing to a six-month review based on turnout metrics and proposal quality—we can streamline decision-making while strengthening long-term participation.

[blockful]

We are voting FOR the proposal.
Reducing the quorum threshold for constitutional votes by 0.5% is a meaningful adjustment that can help the DAO move forward on critical decisions. At the same time, it’s worth keeping in mind that making quorum easier to reach also introduces risks.

That tradeoff should stay on the radar as governance evolves.

[Constitutional] AIP: Constitutional Quorum Threshold Reduction

We support the proposal to reduce the quorum for approving a proposal by 0.5%. We know the importance of quorum to prevent governance attacks and, with Arbitrum’s diversification strategies, an attack can become profitable. It is essential that lowering the 0.5% is not the only measure taken by the Arbitrum Foundation for the DAO. We recommend debating a way to increase the number of votes participating in proposals, either with (1) incentives to attract new delegates, (2) committees like the A…

[WinVerse]

DAOplomats is voting FOR this proposal on Tally.

We supported this proposal during the temp check and we are maintaining that stance for the onchain vote.

[Tally_Support]

Onchain voting for this proposal is ending within 24 hours:
[Vote on Tally: [Constitutional] AIP: Constitutional Quorum Threshold Reduction](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/eip155:42161:0xf07DeD9dC292157749B6Fd268E37DF6EA38395B9/proposal/2616417580805522883)
* * *
I am a bot. Questions? Contact support@tally.xyz

[Tally_Support]

Voting has ended!
===============
[[Constitutional] AIP: Constitutional Quorum Threshold Reduction](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/eip155:42161:0xf07DeD9dC292157749B6Fd268E37DF6EA38395B9/proposal/2616417580805522883)

### Final Votes

| **Category**         | **Result**       | **Details**                 |
|----------------------|------------------|-----------------------------|
| **Quorum reached**   | ✅ | 234.69M of 222.41M         |
| **Majority Support** | ✅ |                             |
| **For**              |                  | 215.70M (89.5%)    |
| **Against**          |                  | 6.31M (2.6%) |
| **Abstain**          |                  | 19.00M (7.9%) |

* * *
I am a bot. Questions? Contact support@tally.xyz