Rationale: We will vote against this proposal because moving all multisig authority to the Foundation concentrates decision‐making power in one place and removes the transparent, community‐driven cost structure that MSS signers provided, making it harder for delegates to verify administrative expenses and adds unnecessary complexity, risks payment delays, and requires extra governance approvals instead of allowing OpCo to assume these duties seamlessly from the start.
Rationale: We are voting Option C: Wind down the whole initiative and return the ARB to the treasury because the current implementation no longer aligns with the original purpose of the approved proposal.
Event Horizon initially received a 7 million ARB delegation to experiment with a public-access voter pool aimed at broadening meaningful community participation in governance. However, the program has since pivoted to an AI-driven, agentic governance model—a fundamental shift that was not part of the original mandate and has not yet been ratified by the DAO.
While we support innovation and experimentation in governance, significant changes to the scope and intent of a treasury-backed initiative should be brought back to the DAO for explicit approval. Until such a revised proposal is submitted and evaluated by the community, we believe it is necessary and appropriate to wind down the current initiative and return the ARB to the treasury.
That said, we strongly recommend that the 7 million ARB not remain idle. Instead, the DAO should explore new ways to redeploy these tokens to continue supporting quorum and enhancing inclusive participation. Should Event Horizon wish to pursue delegation again under a new model, we would welcome a formal proposal clearly outlining their updated goals, structure, and evaluation metrics.
Rationale: We will vote FOR this proposal. It’s quite straightforward, high-ROI treasury move: shifting the redeemed $3.5 million from idle USDC into the already-approved STEP 2 money-market sleeve instantly restores ~4-5 % annual yield and adds no new risk or operational complexity.
Rationale: We’ll be voting FOR this proposal. While we do have some concerns, particularly around the potential for scope and the need for clear accountability as OpCo gains more flexibility we believe the benefits outweigh the risks. The updates make sense given how the DAO and ecosystem have evolved, and they give OpCo the tools it needs to operate more effectively, engage with the right partners, and attract strong talent. Importantly, there are safeguards in place, like spending caps and transparency requirements, that help mitigate potential downsides. On balance, we see this as a positive step toward a more efficient and responsive operational structure for the DAO.
Rationale: We’ll be voting FOR this proposal. While we do have some concerns, particularly around the potential for scope and the need for clear accountability as OpCo gains more flexibility we believe the benefits outweigh the risks. The updates make sense given how the DAO and ecosystem have evolved, and they give OpCo the tools it needs to operate more effectively, engage with the right partners, and attract strong talent. Importantly, there are safeguards in place, like spending caps and transparency requirements, that help mitigate potential downsides. On balance, we see this as a positive step toward a more efficient and responsive operational structure for the DAO.