# Cp0x Delegate Communication Thread **URL:** \ **Category:** Delegate Statements\ **Tags:** delegation, delegate-statements\ **Created:** [March 6, 2024, 6:48pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217 "2024-03-06T18:48:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2025, 8:21pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/182 "2025-05-14T20:21:54Z")
# [The Watchdog: Arbitrum DAO’s Grant Misuse Bounty Program](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/proposal/28485587559812799913134094629469849411398475232393607771326861344548198896843?govId=eip155:42161:0x789fC99093B09aD01C34DC7251D0C89ce743e5a4) * * * This is a great idea that was already accepted in Snapshot 4 months ago. There have been no significant changes in that time, so I voted YES. I like this proposal for several reasons: 1. It will prevent projects from using the grant inappropriately 2. It will reduce operational costs for monitoring projects 3. It will involve more users in projects with grants. Even if they do not find any violations, they will at least understand the project and its prospects in detail * * * Vote: **FOR** Platform: Tally ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2025, 8:44pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/183 "2025-05-19T20:44:52Z")
# [DeFi Renaissance Incentive Program (DRIP)](https://snapshot.box/#/s:arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x0b62de171fbff7a81833f9ebb44b9747189264d7a2cf95e3446223b1c413d2b0) * * * I like the proposal primarily for its thoughtful approach compared to previous grant programs. 1. This time, it is the Arbiter that will decide what and how much to give incentives to projects, which in turn will have to meet the requirements for the season 2. The amount in dollars is significantly less than previous grants - on the one hand, this is good, because large grants greatly deplete the treasury without any certain success for the Arbiter. On the other hand, weak incentives may not affect the attraction of users if this program is not actively promoted. 3. I like that the DAO will also take part in the development of goals for each season. This will give impetus to the development of the community, which will better understand what exactly the Arbiter requires and how to improve the incentive system in order to avoid unnecessary expenses in the future * * * Vote: **FOR** Platform: Snapshot ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2025, 9:53pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/184 "2025-05-23T21:53:20Z")
### [[CONSTITUTIONAL] AIP: ArbOS Version 40 Callisto](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/proposal/13108804573775967668959825241666341617107666532012387058509418598838035461528?govId=eip155:42161:0xf07DeD9dC292157749B6Fd268E37DF6EA38395B9) * * * I voted FOR this proposal Firstly, we actually have no choice because of the very big changes in the main chain - Ethereum Secondly, it is financially beneficial for Arbitrum - we will pay less to the main chain, since blobs have become cheaper to transfer Thirdly, they fixed not only compatibility with Ethereum, but also a bug with Stylus, one of the advantages of Arbitrum * * * Vote: **FOR** Platform: Tally ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2025, 3:00am UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/185 "2025-05-25T03:00:37Z")
# [[Constitutional] AIP: Constitutional Quorum Threshold Reduction](https://snapshot.box/#/s:arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x2d4089d72617eb137d6ee7ab9ae9efbe3cd1e0fcff48df24b926ce6259b734d3) * * * For Constitutional AIP, it is proposed to reduce the quorum from 5% to 4.5%. The situation has developed that the number of tokens is growing more than the voting percentage The last Constitutional vote took place only after an additional voting period (+2 days), but 243.89M out of a quorum of 210.74M voted, so the voting reserve was more than 33 million ARB However, this decision is one of the worst that exists, since by the time this proposal is accepted, the quorum will increase even more and it will be necessary to vote for another reduction in the quorum percentage. There are several other options, one like in Uniswap - to delegate the required number of tokens to top delegates (also a controversial decision, but at least it does not need any changes), and it can be done better than in Uniswap, namely, to delegate the required number of tokens only if the quorum has not been met. The second solution is staking, which has not been launched for six months and which would solve the problem of apathy of ARB token owners While the second solution takes time, the first one is easy to implement right now. * * * Vote: **AGAINST** Platform: Snapshot ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2025, 5:05pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/186 "2025-05-30T17:05:00Z")
# [Wind Down the MSS + Transfer Payment Responsibilities to the Arbitrum Foundation](https://snapshot.box/#/s:arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x1de2707ab4cf792721544a8f82eee98535c16ce437ba2ac95a78c85c20b6d8b0) * * * Rationale: > [@Wind Down the MSS + Transfer Payment Responsibilities to the Arbitrum Foundation](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/wind-down-the-mss-transfer-payment-responsibilities-to-the-arbitrum-foundation/29279/22): > > I voted AGAINST this proposal The MSS simplified and saved DAO funds by organizing multisigs — now all signings are performed by the MSS, not by separate groups in each initiative, while remaining transparent to the DAO Now, due to the fall in the value of the ARB token, the Arbitrum Foundation (AF) will take over signing functions to itself, and we believe that this is a bad decision: 1. Centralization of powers, which has been a trend lately This reduces community participation, which inc… * * * Vote: **AGAINST** Platform: Snapshot ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2025, 5:14pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/187 "2025-05-30T17:14:41Z")
# [Adjust the Voting Power of the Arbitrum Community Pool & Ratify the Agentic Governance Pivot](https://snapshot.box/#/s:arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x9ea3f5ef5b6c838ffc24430bb927baa13bf25dcf5f444358e89f0958bb41a5e7) * * * Rationale: > [@\[RFC\] Proposal to Adjust the Voting Power of the Arbitrum Community Pool & Ratifying the Agentic Governance Pivot](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/rfc-proposal-to-adjust-the-voting-power-of-the-arbitrum-community-pool-ratifying-the-agentic-governance-pivot/29280/28): > > I voted FOR wind down the whole thing and return the ARB to the treasury Rationale: Why do I want to exclude all VP and leave nothing? The thing is that Event Horizon is not really a delegate in the literal sense, since it does not have its own opinion, but is a proxy for the opinions of other delegates, who also have their own VP. Therefore, there is no great sense in leaving 100,000 votes * * * Vote: **FOR wind down the whole thing and return the ARB to the treasury (C)** Platform: Snapshot ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2025, 6:11pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/188 "2025-06-06T18:11:04Z")
# [Reallocate Redeemed USDM Funds to STEP 2 Budget](https://snapshot.box/#/s:arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0xfd373c58adbb013a05c778b71ccffb19e5bbefb8a100232f67eced33c58e22f7) * * * This is undoubtedly the right decision. I am grateful to the team that promptly saw the completion of the project and quickly offered the only right decision - to invest these funds in a new stage of STEP * * * Vote: **FOR** Platform: Snapshot ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2025, 6:21pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/189 "2025-06-06T18:21:29Z")
# [DeFi Renaissance Incentive Program (DRIP)](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/proposal/13050485773425645466153415888358064378805606653363056526521393182333458879398?govId=eip155:42161:0x789fC99093B09aD01C34DC7251D0C89ce743e5a4) * * * After a long period of absence of large grants, Arbitrum is back. Despite the fact that some of my proposals did not make it into the final version (for example, mandatory use of vesting), this is basically a well-thought-out plan for the next year. The main thing is that grants and incentives will be given only to those who help Arbitrum achieve its goals through the promotion of its product - win-win. The amount of grants is small, but a lot depends on the cost of the ARB token, its price can greatly affect the success of the program * * * Vote: **FOR** Platform: Tally ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2025, 8:10pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/190 "2025-06-16T20:10:53Z")
# [Updating the OpCo Foundation’s Operational Capability](https://snapshot.box/#/s:arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x65b2b835f03bc18aa401b88702145e6b7686e8d7ddddfd956837251f8a7a7da1) * * * As I have said before, I am not happy with such changes that reduce control over OpCo, which can consume a lot of funds The main disadvantage of these proposals is the ability to spend funds without a request from the DAO, given the large planned salary of employees who will not have sufficient knowledge and therefore need to be given a mandate for spending. I consider this very irrational and uncontrollable * * * Vote: **AGAINST** Platform: Snapshot ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2025, 8:17pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/191 "2025-06-16T20:17:23Z")
# [Let’s improve our governance forum with three proposals.app feature integrations](https://snapshot.box/#/s:arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x38663c36b26252acff6c6ca43663167858f51f960235dc0441bd2ad4a8f66fb1) * * * The functions offered by Paulo are very useful. As I said earlier - two of them are relevant for me, and I do not need notifications due to my active participation in the Arbitration every day. However, the initial proposed amount turned out to be very large. Despite the detailed answers of the author and the correction of the amount by 3 times, I believe that these functions should be offered as a product for the Foundation or for Labs, so that they implement this in the basic set of the site. In the current situation, the owner of these functions may stop performing them due to circumstances beyond his control. In this case, I would like to have centralized control over convenient functions here * * * Vote: **AGAINST** Platform: Snapshot ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2025, 2:53pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/192 "2025-06-23T14:53:38Z")
# [Arbitrum Treasury Management Council - Consolidating Efforts](https://snapshot.box/#/s:arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0xfab795313df4ef1023c5f7f9027857637cc3841d62dc0b54796fbfa5f8096919) * * * > [@Arbitrum Treasury Management Council - Consolidating Efforts](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/arbitrum-treasury-management-council-consolidating-efforts/29334/26): > > I voted FOR this proposal I support the general goal of the proposal - to streamline Arbitrum DAO’s treasury management and reduce fragmentation. However, I would like to highlight several key risks that should be addressed as part of future on-chain implementation. I see several key risks here: Too much power in the hands of a single entity (Entropy Advisors) Entropy is granted an exclusive and central role as Treasurer without a clear mechanism for replacement. This creates a potential d… * * * Vote: **FOR** Platform: Snapshot ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2025, 2:57pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/193 "2025-06-23T14:57:51Z")
# [[Constitutional] AIP: Remove Cost Cap on Arbitrum Nova](https://snapshot.box/#/s:arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0xeb044e3bdeba71e74dea02abeab4c33fe4bf5ab9def50082863702d5e2112b93) * * * > [@\[Constitutional\] AIP: Remove Cost Cap on Arbitrum Nova](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/constitutional-aip-remove-cost-cap-on-arbitrum-nova/29332/22): > > I voted FOR this proposal As I wrote earlier, it’s cutting unnecessary and significant expenses for Arbitrum - there’s no longer a need to subsidize Nova, as recent upgrades have already brought substantial fee reductions * * * Vote: **FOR** Platform: Snapshot ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2025, 5:24pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/194 "2025-06-23T17:24:48Z")
# [[CONSTITUTIONAL] Register the Sky Custom Gateway contracts in the Router](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/proposal/71020107401388505040510993373598301285550678565865201408741893567942851985019?govId=eip155:42161:0xf07DeD9dC292157749B6Fd268E37DF6EA38395B9) * * * I still believe this rushed proposal won’t solve anything. The root approach needs to change. Adjusting quorum thresholds is unnecessary — doing so could lead to a slippery slope of constant reductions and potential governance attacks * * * Vote: **AGAINST** Platform: Tally ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2025, 5:34pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/195 "2025-06-23T17:34:01Z")
# [[CONSTITUTIONAL] Register the Sky Custom Gateway contracts in the Router](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/proposal/71020107401388505040510993373598301285550678565865201408741893567942851985019?govId=eip155:42161:0xf07DeD9dC292157749B6Fd268E37DF6EA38395B9) * * * Since SKY is one of the leading stablecoin projects in crypto, this is a great opportunity to increase USDS inflows into Arbitrum — especially considering the current hype around stablecoins * * * Vote: **FOR** Platform: Tally ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2025, 5:12pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/196 "2025-07-03T17:12:44Z")
# [Audit Committee Technical Expert Elections](https://snapshot.box/#/s:arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x131574819442cb6da293795ee9faeec4754a5af664b535b654b3d9d3d53f47e1) * * * I voted for Gustavo Grieco, although it was a difficult choice. Gustavo’s big advantage is that he has a lot of experience working with the Arbitrum chain. * * * Vote: FOR **Gustavo Grieco** Platform: Snapshot ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2025, 5:17pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/197 "2025-07-03T17:17:51Z")
# [Extend AGV Council Term and Align Future Elections with Operational Cadence](https://snapshot.box/#/s:arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0xd7529f75df21183d0eb9bce0cc828d56e9a100f449857c16177d98db6497cc16/votes) * * * On the one hand, I think that the six months that the team has been working is clearly not enough to evaluate their contribution, to really do some big work, especially considering that this initiative is relatively new and complex. On the other hand, I understand that the team is planning to raise their salaries (although at the moment the proposal has not yet been launched) and knowing this prospect, I am no longer so sure about extending the current team composition * * * Vote: **ABSTAIN** Platform: Snapshot ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2025, 7:07pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/198 "2025-07-07T19:07:17Z")
# [Arbitrum Research and Development Collective V2 - Extension](https://snapshot.box/#/s:arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x765b297702f21736e7b52c23d781dc76968519fef9c7b1ca1f924d167b2a6899) * * * We have consistently voted against the creation of this committee. As many have pointed out, the way this committee’s budget is structured creates a perverse incentive: they can technically avoid spending anything if not needed — but in order to justify their existence, they are pressured to find ways to spend. This results in a backwards paradigm — instead of allocating funds for necessary work, we’re creating work to justify pre-allocated funds. That’s precisely why I believe this committee is unnecessary. If such work becomes essential, it can be proposed and voted on via Snapshot like any other initiative — using the already designated funds without the need for a permanent structure * * * Vote: **AGAINST** Platform: Snapshot ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2025, 4:52pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/199 "2025-07-10T16:52:09Z")
# [Entropy Advisors: Exclusively Working with the Arbitrum DAO, Year 2 and Year 3](https://snapshot.box/#/s:arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x320cd2a99a0544184c06e1bd305aab1fc226ab0b498e077bc857a07045194f43) * * * > [@Entropy Advisors: Exclusively Working with the Arbitrum DAO, Y2-Y3](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/entropy-advisors-exclusively-working-with-the-arbitrum-dao-y2-y3/29458/28): > > I voted AGAINST this proposal I saw no real effort to reduce Arbitrum’s spending on Entropy, nor did I receive answers to many of the concerns I previously raised. In addition to those earlier points, I’d like to highlight a few key reasons why I oppose the proposal: Staff increase to 14 people Entropy plans to significantly expand its team, but the proposal lacks clarity on why such a large headcount is necessary. They set their own direction without detailing the specific tasks that justi… * * * Vote: **ABSTAIN** Platform: Snapshot ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2025, 5:32pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/200 "2025-07-14T17:32:06Z")
# [[Constitutional] AIP: Update the Upgrade Executors](https://snapshot.box/#/s:arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0xc08147e229fa642ee7da2e5180f225122b8c517024902f21cdcd02b376179b8d) * * * In two weeks, Arbitrum — the author of this proposal — has still not answered key questions regarding the audit. The DAO is being asked to vote on updating contracts whose audits were incomplete and conducted over 2.5 years ago. This should not be approved — or at the very least, delegates should be informed where to find the up-to-date audits, instead of relying on the outdated ones attached to the proposal * * * Vote: **AGAINST** Platform: Snapshot ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/cp0x/32/5455_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2025, 5:39pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/201 "2025-07-14T17:39:31Z")
# [[CONSTITUTIONAL] Register $BORING in the Arbitrum generic-custom gateway](https://snapshot.box/#/s:arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x586de5bf366820c4369c041b0bbad2254d78fafe1dcc1528c1ed661bb4dfb671) * * * As I wrote earlier (back in May), I don’t see any issue with either the existence or absence of such a bridge. Many tokens don’t have an official bridge, and it doesn’t hinder them in any way. But if the authors want to create one, I see no reason to oppose it * * * Vote: **FOR** Platform: Snapshot [Previous page](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217.md?page=9) [Next page](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217.md?page=11)