We should indeed.
I believe that proceeding with this course of action will just turn this into an endless cat and mouse race.
Because vote-buying, in delegated token-weighted governance is inevitable.
Trying to censor vote-buying by deny-listing some votes, will only force these platforms into doing it in a much more obfuscated way, that will be way more difficult to track.
And at least right now, when a vote is bought on LobbyFi, that information is instantly public. In fact, I believe that that was the only reason that empowered the delegates in the DAO to then respond to a vote being bought, by strategically voting on other candidates like many shared in OpCo – Oversight and Transparency Committee (OAT) Elections
So in my point of view, what we should learn from the past months exercise is that we should look into embracing vote buying as part of our governance process.
LobbyFi is being open and transparent right here in the forum, as to how they are pricing their votes. it would be great to see the @Arbitrum Foundation, @offchainlabs and all other delegates engaging with their posts (like this one for the OAT) so we can get better decisions on how to adequately price each vote.