# 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:** 6
**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:** [September 17, 2024, 3:22pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/102 "2024-09-17T15:22:33Z")
# [[Aave DAO] LTIPP Grant Extension Request](https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x785e8ed145d34ab4c9fea725cf0ce31267f90bc2ed4423e6e718c5e736e84c06) * * * This proposal, like several similar ones for extending LTIPP, has both pros and cons. Cons: - The DAO Arbitrum voted for Detox programs to assess their effectiveness and necessity. - in case of extending grants, this project will have an advantage over its competitor Pros: - there are objective reasons why the project did not manage to spend all the allocated funds from the grant - no additional funding is required Having weighed all the pros and cons, and in order not to remain Abstein, I believe that it will be more useful for the Arbitrum to give these projects the opportunity to extend LTIPP * * * 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:** [September 17, 2024, 3:26pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/103 "2024-09-17T15:26:28Z")
# [Enhancing Multichain Governance: Upgrading RARI Governance Token on Arbitrum](https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x22f9e560d0a4aac46cc1e49ea71858d531226d0750409acdbfd766fa9c5eb1cb) * * * The essence is the transfer of voting tokens to the Arbitrum chain. In July, the RARI community supported the same proposal, now it is the turn of the Arbitrum DAO. To transfer tokens, it is necessary to configure the Arbitrum gateway to match L1 RARI with L2 Arbitrum. An excellent proposal in terms of the possibility of transferring voting from the Mainnet to the Arbitrum, which provides great advantages for most DAO projects 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:** [September 17, 2024, 5:36pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/104 "2024-09-17T17:36:12Z")
# [Fund the Stylus Sprint](https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0xbe03044e4eeddfe838b719cffe234aced53238da1cef7f3e5e8c2a86aadcccb6) * * * Creating a fund for developers who will implement their projects on Stylus. Summary: A total of 5 million ARB is allocated. Grants will be allocated for projects from 100k to 1 million ARB, depending on the application. Also, the budget is 150k for the salary for the committee, which will determine and support the projects for 15 months. And 30k for Questbook, through which applications will come It should be noted that Stylus has [some shortcomings in terms of compatibility with Solidity, namely with memory](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/stylus-sdk-audit/26674#p-58099-critical-severity-22) Otherwise, it is a ready-made and reliable product for the development of both Arbitrum and the industry as a whole. * * * 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:** [September 18, 2024, 12:49pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/105 "2024-09-18T12:49:08Z")
# [Constitutional AIP: Proposal to adopt Timeboost, a new transaction ordering policy](https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0xffe9bb38228fdaf3d121140856fd2d51c2ca7f8e0d1021c07e791cebb541129a) * * * Timeboost - an auction to buy a time slot for the earliest transaction. There is an assumption that this way you can transfer profits from MEV to the Treasury. Moreover, in this case, MEV can use strategies that do not harm users due to the closed mempool. There are several options for extracting profit: 1. Collect in ETH and put it in the Treasury 2. Collect in ARB and burn. It seems to me that collecting in ARB and burning is a bad option. There will not be enough ARB to affect the price of the token - we will simply destroy it without profit * * * Vote: **FOR Collect bids in ETH to treasury** 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:** [September 18, 2024, 12:58pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/106 "2024-09-18T12:58:04Z")
# [Terms of Tenure for STEP program manager](https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0xd05fe5e629072098183d454fb5084715a19d5b3285af2b87c3dad7b61d614954) * * * The voting is happening due to a community error in fact. No one kept track of the fact that the program only included 100,000 ARB, and the applications of candidates were diverse and were not limited by any amounts. In this regard, I believe that a more logical solution would be to hold the elections again - this way we will be able to set the same conditions for all participants in the elections. Otherwise, it turns out that the winner can designate any amount as a reward for himself. * * * Vote: (1st) New election at $86,581 per year, (2nd) 6 months from available funds, (3rd) Additional funds for one year , (4th) Liquidation of RWAs and STEP, (5th) 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:** [September 18, 2024, 1:37pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/107 "2024-09-18T13:37:02Z")
# [ArbitrumDAO Off-site](https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x8f242363dbc69d640799b461b27ba7b957ab13af87389b699639ba335b8b5e91) * * * I would like to support this format of communication outside of online. As I wrote earlier on the forum, in order to attract a lot of people, a good incentive is needed, and this is: 1. Main event The largest projects, which also have votes in ArbitrumDAO, often come to such events. Therefore, in this way we attract large projects. 2. Travel payment In this way, we will attract enthusiasts who are ready to spend a lot of their time on ArbitrumDAO, but do not have sufficient funds to travel around the world. Excluding one of these factors reduces the effectiveness of attracting delegates. * * * Vote: (1st) IRL/conference/scholarships, (2nd) IRL/conference/no scholarships, (3rd) IRL/separate/scholarships, (4th) IRL/separate/no scholarships, (5th) Drop idea and do nothing, (6th) Online event, (7th) 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:** [September 19, 2024, 6:52pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/108 "2024-09-19T18:52:16Z")
# [GovHack Devcon in Bangkok - Hack Humanity](https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x41bc78325225705741c2eaebd9352bde74c2b28867e1a7321ccab0fa8fd5c2b7) * * * cp0x always supports initiatives for the development of ArbitrumDAO and public good. Request $156k on GovHack (Brussels was $100k more expensive (good breakdown of costs) Adequate costs for the required organization of the event * * * 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:** [September 20, 2024, 4:10pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/109 "2024-09-20T16:10:06Z")
# [[Non-Constitutional] Funds to Bolster Foundation’s Strategic Partnerships Budget](https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x852b7e7bc83db6c3628695816647bdeb9825d10e445a71dcc94e651b2f8a71b9) * * * The Arbitrum Foundation wants to use 250 million ARB out of 750 initially intended for development and grants. I didn’t like that the proposal doesn’t explain anywhere why they need exactly 250 million. 1. There is no clear strategy for where and how much will be spent. 2. They don’t disclose their current expenses, but only indicate the projects they cooperate with, without specifying the funds. 3. There is no explanation of how much has already been allocated to them and how much of it has been spent. * * * 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:** [September 20, 2024, 4:14pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/110 "2024-09-20T16:14:12Z")
# [[Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum DAO Delegate Incentive Program](https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x1326cb522a74b29fb12d52bb302b245180c2b8f6e1fe8f295c4447bd96a5bacd) * * * Choice of two incentive programs. I have already written about their pros and cons in the main thread of the proposal, and the main points are: 1. I am more for objectivity, and v.1.5. is impossible to implement without taking into account specific people who may have their own view on the proposal and the delegate. 2. In v.1.1 we added a reaction time to the proposal on the forum, which will positively affect the activity of delegates and their commenting. * * * Vote: \*\*FOR - DIP V1.1 \*\* 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:** [September 25, 2024, 5:13pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/111 "2024-09-25T17:13:50Z")
# [Nominee Selection for Security Council](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/council/security-council/election/2/round-1) * * * I nominated 3 active candidates who have been very thorough in the forums, not just on the voting page. I think these three candidates would be great for the Security Council because of their experience with security and audits. * * * Vote: **FOR** - Cyfrin ([Profile - Cyfrin - Arbitrum](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Cyfrin)) - Dedaub ([Profile - Dedaub - Arbitrum](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Dedaub)) - Hacken ([Hacken — Candidate for Security Council (September '24 Elections)](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/hacken-candidate-for-security-council-september-24-elections/26937)) 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:** [September 28, 2024, 3:48am UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/112 "2024-09-28T03:48:16Z")
# [[Non-Constitutional] Whitelist Infura Nova Validator](https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0xaa831b9306c3ec4f4a9b9731e7c445e540e5a24461a79f1166cb8dcdfa692d09) * * * Infura wants to be a validator of Arbitrum Nova. It is already a member of the data availability committee (DAC). But this is according to them, and on the Arbitrum website ([The state of Arbitrum's progressive decentralization | Arbitrum DAO - Governance docs](https://docs.arbitrum.foundation/state-of-progressive-decentralization#2-validator-ownership)) they are not indicated. I am 99% sure that they are in the committee and the data is simply outdated. * * * 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:** [September 28, 2024, 3:50am UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/113 "2024-09-28T03:50:08Z")
# [[NON-CONSTITUTIONAL] Arbitrum DAO Procurement Committee: Phase II Proposal](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/proposal/93496910583545921039254255671954964968329693484106479494661805749408858477569?govId=eip155:42161:0x789fC99093B09aD01C34DC7251D0C89ce743e5a4) * * * Continuation of the procurement committee. Their main activity is providing Arbitrum projects with grants for audits, RPC. They rolled out a report on their work and what will happen in the sequel. At the Snapshot stage we voted FOR. * * * 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:** [September 28, 2024, 3:52am UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/114 "2024-09-28T03:52:10Z")
# [UPDATED - Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/proposal/70429238801539452185774644949439873171403711884919863798646613157877144482819?govId=eip155:42161:0x789fC99093B09aD01C34DC7251D0C89ce743e5a4) * * * Sponsoring 30ETH at Attackathon Initially in Snaphot I was against it because I misunderstood the info, then I talked with author and he explained to me about sponsorship. * * * 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:** [September 28, 2024, 3:53am UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/115 "2024-09-28T03:53:39Z")
# [Constitutional AIP - Extend Delay on L2Time Lock](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/proposal/27888300053486667232765715922683646778055572080881341292116987136155397805421?govId=eip155:42161:0xf07DeD9dC292157749B6Fd268E37DF6EA38395B9) * * * Increasing Delay from 3 to 8 days, so that users can withdraw their funds if they don’t like something. The reason itself is some naive information, almost no one follows the decisions of ArbitrumDAO, only if the info goes viral. But in any case, 8 days Delay is better. * * * 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:** [September 28, 2024, 3:54am UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/116 "2024-09-28T03:54:52Z")
# [Research on context and retention](https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x23985f3bb58758f0f43c5248085f6b7f1783c8e205604262336d043558aeca0c) * * * Request to use data from the Arbitrum Forum and Discord for analysis by TogetherCrew, a team that works on Web3 social networks. All the information was already publicly available (I don’t understand why permission is needed then) This data is also planned for Hivemind, a bot that allows community members to ask questions about proposals and discussions. No money required. * * * 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:** [September 28, 2024, 3:56am UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/117 "2024-09-28T03:56:34Z")
# [An EIP-4824 powered daoURI for Arbitrum DAO](https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x7232f2c1d1da127cb65ee6036fc52ed6fc02540aaf6cf79a3045b6031e819a35) * * * We already [voted for this proposal a month ago](https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x04971448620419df86ea930d3f4ae75ad4fff2ebcaead84687a27475f00e24d5) But there was only a Yes or No option. Everything is the same here, only two YES options: 1. For – Use ENS txt records This simply records text at the arbitrumfoundation.eth address, but this is some kind of collective farm. It is not clear why some information is recorded like this 2. For – Use registration contract This means that they will make a simple contract for the EIP-4824 factory to record data about the DAO. This will require additional on-chain voting. Considering that no money is required, I suggest the option For – Use registration contract (the same option as a month ago) * * * 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:** [October 6, 2024, 8:11pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/118 "2024-10-06T20:11:59Z")
# [[Non-Constitutional] Funds to Bolster Foundation’s Strategic Partnerships Budget](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/proposal/78608365328815179822381240433375943106975722017227920505592824878237374730465?govId=eip155:42161:0x789fC99093B09aD01C34DC7251D0C89ce743e5a4) * * * As at the Snapshot stage, I did not see a clear plan for the development of the Foundation. A simple table with potential partners for $100 million does not reveal any information about future spending. There is no vision of the future, where is it striving? And without a strategy, there is no understanding whether the funds are being spent correctly. * * * 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:** [October 6, 2024, 8:13pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/119 "2024-10-06T20:13:51Z")
# [ArbitrumDAO strategic “Off-site” (online) updated proposal](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/proposal/96690486288059875871645030622562174419564010435288438848687174619767247452877?govId=eip155:42161:0x789fC99093B09aD01C34DC7251D0C89ce743e5a4) * * * Snapshot voting came to a strange conclusion to hold a delegate gathering online. We are online every day on the forum and in Telegram. When we understand how to gather offline - then I will vote for It seems to me that allocating money for online is a bit strange * * * 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:** [October 6, 2024, 8:15pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/120 "2024-10-06T20:15:43Z")
# [Enhancing Multichain Governance: Upgrading RARI Governance Token on Arbitrum](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/proposal/56768509231150680433760428191516666361790213029100482092064768634784370622764?govId=eip155:42161:0xf07DeD9dC292157749B6Fd268E37DF6EA38395B9) * * * This is a continuation of the token transition to the Arbitrum. In Snapshot I already voted FOR - this is the next stage. * * * 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:** [October 11, 2024, 3:13pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217/121 "2024-10-11T15:13:45Z")
# [LTIPP Retroactive Community Funding Selections](https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x817ca6edf6d7e5c9fd5c9839cdd266c600054a443169fdb577bc7567f70073f0) Disclaimer: I am an interested party in this vote and in accordance with the proposal [Should the DAO Create COI & Self Voting Policies?](https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0xbbec2fbf891d9abb21e8be380f79806519df8294d1d2cdce155d105fd1fed8db) decision I am using the **Disclosure Policy**. I only asked for 5k ARB, which means that according to the rules of this retro-funding, the other applicants have 95k ARB left to pay for their contribution. Vote: **FOR cp0x** Platform: Snapshot [Previous page](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217.md?page=5) [Next page](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/cp0x-delegate-communication-thread/22217.md?page=7)