DAOplomats Delegate Communication Thread

Governance Delegate Statements
,
1

Name: DAOplomats
Delegate Address: 0xd4879f876ee383067f80acadbe283b93141908e9
Tally Profile URL : Tally | daoplomats.eth
Governance tracking: [Internal tracker] (Notion – The all-in-one workspace for your notes, tasks, wikis, and databases.)
Forum: @jengajojo @baer.eth @WinVerse
Twitter: x.com
Languages: English, German, Hindi
Website: www.daoplomats.org

ABOUT

DAOplomats is a governance-as-a-service organisation that empowers DAOs through effective governance, treasury management, grants programs, and community-building initiatives. We leverage our expertise to help DAOs achieve their full potential by fostering collaboration and maximising positi

Values

Objective Decision-Making: We implement frameworks that combine qualitative and quantitative analysis to arrive at well-reasoned conclusions.

Decentralisation: We believe in empowering communities and strive to push decision-making power to the edges.

Positive Sum: We prioritise collaboration and win-win scenarios, fostering a collaborative environment where all stakeholders benefit.

Experience:

We have a proven ability to:

  • Design and implement effective governance frameworks.
  • Analyse proposals objectively and make data-driven recommendations.
  • Foster productive discussions and build consensus among community members.
  • Manage grants programs that support innovation and community growth.

image
image1920×648 44.4 KB

4 Likes
2

Proposal: AIP 1.05: Return 700M $ARB to the DAO Treasury

Vote: Against

Rationale: This is a duplicate proposal and we are aware that sending 750M ARB could have been communicated more effectively and open, It is reasonable to give the Arbitrum Foundation the budget necessary for the next few years, especially with the implementation of AIP 1.1 providing more structure.

Proposal: AIP-1.1 - Lockup, Budget, Transparency

Vote: For

Comment : We are in favor of this proposal since it offers clarity to the DAO and a positive way forward

We believe that this proposal, which aims to allocate funds towards the continued development and maintenance of the Arbitrum network, is crucial for its long-term success. Additionally, we appreciate the transparency provided in the proposal, including a clear breakdown of the proposed allocation and the rationale behind it. The Daostewards view this proposal as a positive step forward for the Arbitrum network and we fully support it.

Proposal: AIP-1.2 - Foundation and DAO Governance

Vote: For

Comment : We are in favor of this proposal since it offers clarity to the DAO and a positive way forward

Refined: Arbitrum proposes establishing a governance model for the DAO via a Foundation, aligning with our community-driven principle. We, as Daostewards, support this proposal because it ensures transparency, accountability, and clear roles and responsibilities for DAO stakeholders, improving efficiency and coordination. Our vote advances the goal of building a thriving and sustainable decentralized ecosystem.

3 Likes
3

Thanks for the update fren.

1 Like
4

Thanks for updating @LiviuC .

5

Proposal: AIP - 3 [Non-Constitutional] Fund the Grants Framework Proposal Milestone 1
Vote: For
Rationle: The Plurality Labs teams takes an innovative approach in order to solve some of the problems we see during resource allocation in DAOs. We support this application and we are confident that these experiments will offer interesting insights and solutions for the DAO as well as the crypto ecosystem at large.

3 Likes
6

Proposal : AIP 4: Update Security Council Election Start Date to Ensure Time for Security Audit
Voted : FOR

Rationale: By allowing for an on-chain election process, complete implementation, security audits, and community confidence can be ensured. This is crucial for the successful functioning of the Security Council and its future elections.

3 Likes
7

Proposal : AIP 6 Update Security Council Election Start Date to Ensure Time for Security Audit
Voted : FOR

Rationale: This is a major step towards enhancing the integrity and effectiveness of the Arbitrum governing system. The change empowers a secure, transparent, and timely process for electing Arbitrum Security Council members, adhering to constitution guidelines, ensuring compliance, and maintaining a balanced, accountable governance structure.

3 Likes
8

Proposal : AIP 7 - Arbitrum One Governance Parameter Fixes
Voted : FOR

Rationale: This proposal addresses critical issues identified in the system’s operation, ensuring its stability and accuracy. These essential updates enhance the system’s efficiency and transparency while aligning with the community’s interests, having undergone a thorough audit for added security and trustworthiness. Hence we are in favor of this proposal

1 Like
9

AIP 9: Arbitrum Short-term Incentive Program

Voted: For

Rationale: This empowers the DAO by accelerating network growth, fostering innovation, and gathering valuable data. The program ensures accountability and governance while supporting the Arbitrum ecosystem’s expansion.

2 Likes
10

Proposal: Empowering Early Contributors: The Community Arbiter Proposal

Voted: Abstain

Rationale: Rewarding early contributions is always good but without clear documentation of who these Arbiters are and most (if not all) of their contributions, DAOStewards vote to abstain.

2 Likes
11

Proposal: Build Optimal Onboarding for STIP Teams (BOOST)

Voted: Against

Rationale: With Galxe — set to receive STIP funding — offering services that overlap, we see little to no reason to go ahead with this proposal. DAOStewards vote against this proposal.

2 Likes
12

Rabbithole was not included in round 1 of STIP btw.

13

Proposal: Activate ARB Staking
Voted: Against & Lowest Amount

Rationale: Funding initiatives that drive user engagement, and directly contribute to ecosystem growth will be a better way to manage the funds requested for the staking rewards

Proposal: Non-Constitutional AIP: Arbitrum Security Enhancement Fund
Voted: Against

Rationale: Was discontinued with talks about the procurement framework in motion

Proposal: Consolidate Security Proposals into a RFP Process
Voted: For

Rationale: Creating a framework for security proposals is good. It brings structure and leaves room for various high-quality security providers to interact with the ArbitrumDAO

Proposal: The Arbitrum Coalition
Voted: Abstain

Rationale: The concept behind the Arbitrum coalition is great and needed. However, prior to L2BEAT stepping down as DAO Advocate, there were centralization concerns, and thus DAOStewards voted to abstain

Proposal: Proposal to Backfund Successful STIP Proposals
Voted: Against

Rationale: We were not in support of this proposal. We would have preferred to see how the projects that already received STIP funds perform before sending out more funds

Proposal: Funding Gas Rebate and Trading Competition Program to Amplify Arbitrum’s Ecosystem Growth
Voted: Against

Rationale: We believe the timing of this proposal was all wrong. It should have been included when the STIP was live rather than coming as a stand-alone proposal

Proposal: AIP: ArbOS Version 11
Voted: For

Rationale: We were in support of the changes and upgrades to the Arbitrum chain seeing they have been audited

Proposal: Timeline Extension for STIP and Backfund Grantees
Voted: Voted Extend for both

Rationale: After reviewing the proposal, and sighting the extreme variations in KYC timing and inappropriate timing for the backfund STIPs, it only made sense to extend the deadline

Proposal: Experimental Incentive System for Active ArbitrumDAO Delegates
Voted: For

Rationale: We voted in favor of incentivizing delegates for their participation in the ArbitrumDAO. We have been in a few communities that implemented this and have seen how such programs foster more active participation, bringing in newer contributors in the process

Proposal: Establish the ‘Arbitrum Research & Development Collective’
Voted: Abstain then Lowest to Highest

Rationale: We abstained and then voted from lowest to highest. If the ARDC should be implemented, we should start with the lowest possible cost iteration, and see how that turns out before pushing to scale

[Non-Constitutional]: Establish the ArbitrumDAO Procurement Committee
Voted: For

Rationale: Establishing the Procurement Committee adds a needed layer of structure to the ArbitrumDAO. DAOStewards vote in favor of this proposal.

Constitutional AIP - Security Council Improvement Proposal
Voted: For

Rationale: Sighting the potential risk of removing the lower threshold, DAOStewards votes to increase the multi-sig threshold to 9/12 as this is a more straightforward approach to tackling the Stage requirement

[Constitutional] Changes to the Constitution and the Security Council Election Process
Voted: For

Rationale: Providing better wording is essential to ensure clarity in the Constitution and the community at large. DAOStewards voted in favor of these changes.

AIP: Batch Poster Manager and Sequencer Inbox Finality Fix
Voted: For

Rationale: These proposed changes are highly welcome as it doesn’t affect the original model but add a layer of security. DAOStewards votes in favor of this proposal.

Empowering Early Contributors: The Community Arbiter Proposal 2.0
Voted: Abstain

Rationale: When this proposal dropped last time out, some clarifications were requested by the DAO. These weren’t still tended to so DAOStewards voted to abstain.

Funding for Into the Dungeons: Machinata - a PvP Digital Miniature Game
Voted: Against

Rationale: DAOStewards voted against this proposal. Some context here.

[Non-constitutional] Proposal to fund Plurality Labs Milestone 1B(ridge)
Voted: For

Rationale: DAOStewards are in favor of this proposal. More context here.

[Snapshot] Arbitrum Research and Development Collective Elections

Rationale: We participated in the election process for the members of ARDC and voted for these candidates giving rationales.

[Snapshot] [Non-Emergency Action] Fix Fee Oversight ArbOS v20 “Atlas”
Voted: For

Rationale: We were generally in favor of this proposal and voted in favor of setting L1 surplus fee and L2 minimum base fee.

[Snapshot] Catalyze Arbitrum Gaming: HADOUKEN!
Voted: For

Rationale: This will grow the Arbitrum ecosystem in leaps and bounds. We voted in favor of this proposal. We also believe having an advisor is important.

[Snapshot] Expand Tally Support for the Arbitrum DAO
Voted: For

Rationale: We reviewed the proposed additions Tally was looking to bring on and they were good initiatives. We decided to support the upgrades.

[Snapshot] Double-Down on STIP Successes (STIP-Bridge)
Voted: Against

Rationale: We weren’t in support of this proposal at the current iteration when on Snapshot so we voted against the proposal.

4 Likes
14

[Tally] Arbitrum Stable Treasury Endowment Program

Voted: For

We were in favor of this proposal.

Exploring the RWA vertical is a positive onlook to treasury diversification. We believe the Arbitrum Treasury and Sustainability WG was appointed to bring these sorts of ideas to life so we can learn along the way. At the end of STEP 1, we can review what worked and what didn’t.

[Tally] Empowering Early Contributors: The Community Arbiter Proposal 2.0

Voted: For

This time around, there was a more detailed breakdown of Arbiters application for retroactive rewards so we voted in favor of the proposal.

[Tally] Expand Tally Support for the Arbitrum DAO

Voted: For

We maintained our support from Snapshot and looking forward to the implementation of the suggested upgrades.

[Tally] Request for Continuation of the Arbitrum DDA Program Request

Voted: For

Here, we maintained our support from Snapshot as well. These domains are important aspects the DAO needs to pay attention to and keeping the lights on here will do just that.

[Snapshot] Delegate to Voter Enfranchisement Pool — Event Horizon

Voted: For

We are in support of delegating 7M ARB to the voter enfranchisement pool and will love to see the effect it brings over the course of the year.

[Snapshot] Safeguarding Software Developers’ Rights & the Right to Privacy

Voted: to fund with 500k ARB each

We are glad this was brought to the DAO and was happy to support the request as a form of public good.

[Snapshot] Subsidy Fund for Security Services

Voted: for one cohort of eight weeks, $2.5M

In need of clarifications before Tally but support the initiative.

15

[Snapshot] GovHack at ETH CC (Brussels)

Voted: For

We are supportive of this proposal. There have also been a history of success with previous gov hacks so that further solidifies this rationale.

[Snapshot] Proposal for Approval of DeDaub as the ADPC Security Advisor

Voted: Nil

Unfortunately, I missed the vote deadline but signaling the support for the proposal nevertheless. We would be voting in favor if it goes to an onchain vote although that is unlikely at this time.

Adding DeDaub as a security SME to the ADPC is vital and required so we glad to see the team move to secure their services.

[Tally] Double-Down on STIP Successes (STIP-Bridge)

Voted: Against

We voted against this proposal during temp check and did the same during the onchain vote. We would have preferred to at least see the results of the LTIPP before discussing what a STIP-bridge could look like.

[Snapshot] Pilot Phase: M&A for Arbitrum DAO

Voted: For

We are in favor of this proposal. Conducting a pilot program is always a good first step and we will love to see the results at the end of the eight weeks.

[Tally] GovHack at ETH CC (Brussels)

Voted: For

We maintained our stance from the temp check, voting in favor during the onchain vote. We can’t wait to see the fruits of the gov brainstorms on Forum.

[Snapshot] STIP Addendum

[Snapshot] Arbitrum Multi-sig Support Service (MSS)

Voted: For

We are in favor of this proposal as it will undoubtedly safeguard the DAO’s interests based on current expenditure analysis.

[Snapshot] Streamlining the LTIPP Bounties

Voted: For

We are in favor of this proposal. We commend the LTIPP council’s efforts and trust their judgment.

[Snapshot] Kwenta x Perennial: Arbitrum Onboarding Incentives

Voted: Abstain

We voted to abstain on this proposal for the same reasons we did with Curve Finance.

2 Likes
17

[Tally] Front-end Interface to Force Transaction Inclusion During Sequencer Downtime

Voted: For

We were happy to support this proposal during the onchain vote as it provides a quick fix during sequencer downtimes.

[Snapshot] Set up a Sub-Committee for the Security Services Subsidy Fund

Voted: Against

The ADPC was willing to take on this responsibility so there was no need — at least right now — to create this sub-committee.

[Snapshot] AIP: Nova Fee Router Proposal (ArbOS 30)

Voted: For

This proposal will automate the transfer process of funds accrued from transaction fees on Nova to the DAO’s treasury. We were happy to support it.

[Tally] Catalyze Gaming Ecosystem Growth on Arbitrum

Voted: Against

We weren’t in support of the requested funding and the projected timeline for deliverables.

[Snapshot] AIP: Activate Stylus and Enable Next-Gen WebAssembly Smart Contracts (ArbOS 30)

Voted: For

Interoperability, preferred languages, and more. It was an easy yes for us.

[Snapshot] AIP: Support RIP-7212 for Account Abstraction Wallets (ArbOS 30)

Voted: For

A healthy user security improvement. This was a welcome initiative we were happy to support.

[Tally] Constitutional AIP - Security Council Improvement Proposal

Voted: For

We were in favor of increasing the number of seats to 9/12.

[Tally] ArbitrumDAO Contribution; Safeguarding Software Developers’ Rights

Voted: For

We were happy to support this proposal during the temp check and now during the onchain vote.

[Snapshot] Election of STEP Program Manager

Voted: 100% for Steakhouse

They are very knowledgeable on RWA monitoring and have dipped their feet in the Arbitrum waters, offering services to several protocols within Arbitrum so we were happy to support them.

[Snapshot] [NON-CONSTITUTIONAL] Pilot Phase: Arbitrum Ventures Initiative

Voted: For [No IRL Event]

We were generally in support of this initiative but against funding the IRL event.

[Snapshot] AIP: BoLD - permissionless validation for Arbitrum

Voted: For (in all three proposals)

As we look to achieving Stage 2, we were pleased to support this upgrade along with associated bond and op cost sentiment.

[Snapshot] Pilot Stage – Treasury Backed Vaults research and development

Voted: Against

While the proposal shows promise, we believe the Snapshot vote was rushed and were generally against it as is.

[Snapshot] [Non-Constitutional] Betting on Builders: Infinite Launchpad Proposal

Voted: Against

It is definitely a good initiative. However, we had some concerns and this potentially resulted in us voting against.

[Tally] Kwenta x Perennial: Arbitrum Onboarding Incentives

Voted: Abstain

We maintained our vote from the temp check sighting the same rationale we had with Curve.

[Snapshot] ArbitrumHub Evolution: The Next Step in Streamlining Information Access and Raising Awareness for Arbitrum DAO

Voted: Against

We strongly resonated with the concern from delegates regarding the proposed cost so we voted against this proposal in its current form.

[Snapshot] Multisig Support Service (MSS) Elections

There were several qualified candidates so we decided to go with those with experience in Arbitrum and those we have been involved with in some degree both in Arbitrum and across other DAOs. They were:

  • Limes.eth
  • Griff Green
  • JoJo
  • Alex “Slobo.eth” Slobodnik
  • Feems
  • Sinkas
  • Disruption Joe
  • Frisson
  • DAOplomats
1 Like
19

[Snapshot] Approval of STEP Committee Recommendations

Voted: For

We were pleased with the recommendations provided by the STEP committee so we voted in favor.

[Tally] Subsidy Fund Proposal from the ADPC

Voted: For

We were in support of the cohort on Snapshot so we maintained that position during the onchain vote.

[Tally] Pilot Phase: Arbitrum Ventures Initiative

Voted: For

With No IRL Events implemented during the onchain vote, we were happy to maintain our yes vote from Snapshot.

[Snapshot] Improving Predictability in Arbitrum DAO’s Operations

Voted: Improving Predictability

Having an EOY holiday embedded in the DAO’s calendar and a structured cadence for proposals to go on Snapshot and Tally is good and one we were happy to support.

[Snapshot] Pilot for a Questbook Jumpstart fund for Problem Definition and DAO Improvement

Voted: Against

There were significant overlaps with the Firestarter program already being run so we were against the proposal in it’s current state.

[Snapshot] Furucombo’s Misuse of Funds

Voted: FOR - Ban Furucombo from the Arb

We are not supportive of these sort of actions so we voted to ban Furucombo.

[Snapshot] Change Arbitrum Expansion Program to Allow Deployments of new Orbit Chains on any Blockchain

Voted: FOR: Any blockchain network

This proposal would enhance ecosystem growth so we were happy to support it on Snapshot.

21

[Snapshot] Gaming Catalyst Program (GCP) Council Voting

Voted: 33.3% each for Coinflip (Gov), David Bolger (BD) and Karthik Raju (Venture)

We would have preferred to abstain but we did support the individuals we feel are best suited for those positions.

[Snapshot] Entropy Advisors: Exclusively Working With Arbitrum DAO

Voted: Do not Fund

We agree Entropy has been great for the Arbitrum DAO but we couldn’t support this proposal because of its cost.

[Snapshot] [Non-constitutional] Incentives Detox Proposal

Voted: FOR

We were supportive of taking a break from incentives to really dial in on learnings. This would in turn help finetune future incentive programs we would run.

[Snapshot] ARB Staking: Unlock ARB Utility and Align Governance

Voted: FOR

ARB Staking unlocks various possibilities with the ARB governance token and the future of staking rewards. We supported this initiative by voting in favor during the temp check.

[Snapshot] Transparency and Standardized Metrics for Orbit Chains

Voted: FOR

We believe the metrics growthepie would be producing would be quite valuable for the DAO, so we supported this proposal during the temp check.

[Snapshot] ArbitrumDAO Governance Analytics Dashboard

Voted: FOR

We were in favor of this proposal as we believe this governance dashboard would make more critical governance analysis available for the DAO.

[Tally] [Constitutional] ArbOS 31 “Bianca” (Stylus, RIP-7212 Support, Nova Fee Router)

Voted: FOR

We supported all the upgrades during the temp check and maintained that stance for the onchain vote.

[Tally] Arbitrum Multi-sig Support Service (MSS)

Voted: FOR

We maintained our stance from Snapshot, voting in favor during the onchain vote.

[Snapshot] Should the DAO Default to using Shielded Voting for Snapshot Votes?

Voted: For Elections Only

Implementing this should serve as a good experimentation so we voted to use shielded voting for elections only at this point.

[Snapshot] Proposal to Temporary Extend Delegate Incentive System

Voted: FOR

We supported this temporary incentive extension as we have been pleased with the positive effect of this initiative so far and would love to see it continue.

[Snapshot] ArbitrumDAO Off-site

Voted: FOR

This is a good experimentation and one we were happy to support during the temp check.

[Snapshot] An (EIP-4824 powered) daoURI for the Arbitrum DAO

Voted: AGAINST

This proposal didn’t follow the right governance procedures so we voted against it.

[Snapshot] Strategic Treasury Management on Arbitrum

Voted: AGAINST

This is a good proposal but we would love to see an RFP process around it before moving forward. Thus, we voted against it during temp check.

[Snapshot] Should the DAO Create COI & Self Voting Policies?

Voted: FOR: Strict Self-voting Policy

We supported the creation of these policies but leaned towards a strict self-voting policy during the temp check vote as we believe that would be much more healthy for the DAO.

[Tally] Entropy Advisors: Exclusively Working With Arbitrum DAO

Voted: AGAINST

We maintained our stance from Snapshot, voting against during the onchain vote.

[Snapshot] Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Voted: Panda Partners

We were happy to support this attackathon as panda partners as we believe security is important and we are generally in favor of initiatives that benefit the Ethereum ecosystem.

1 Like
23

[Snapshot] [Constitutional] Extend Delay on L2Time Lock

Voted: FOR

We were happy to support extending the time the Security Council would have to act on malicious proposals.

[Snapshot] STIP-Bridge Operational Budget

Voted: FOR

The budget was already approved during this proposal’s onchain vote, so we were in favor of approving the compensation.

[Snapshot] [Replace Oversight Committee with MSS] Delegate to Voter Enfranchisement Pool — Event Horizon

Voted: FOR

We supported the replacement of the oversight committee here to the MSS as they were created for moments like this.

[Snapshot] ArbitrumDAO Procurement Committee Phase II

Voted: Yes - Extend

We were in favor of granting the ADPC another six months to complete a twelve-month term as we were happy with the work done so far.

[Tally] Funds to bootstrap the first BoLD validator

Voted: FOR

We maintained our support of this proposal during the onchain vote.

[Tally] ARB Staking: Unlock ARB Utility and Align Governance

Voted: FOR

We maintained our support from Snapshot during the onchain vote.

[Snapshot] [Pyth Network] Arbitrum LTIPP Extension Request

Voted: AGAINST

Sticking to the social agreement of the Incentive Detox proposal, we voted against this proposal.

[Snapshot] Enhancing Multichain Governance: Upgrading RARI Governance Token on Arbitrum

Voted: FOR

Seeing the RARI DAO’s proposal to implement a token upgrade on Arbitrum was a welcome initiative and one we were glad to support.

[Snapshot] Synthetix LTIP Grant Extension Request

Voted: AGAINST

We voted against it for the same reasons as we did with Pyth Network.

[Snapshot] Fund the Stylus Sprint

Voted: FOR

We supported funding this initiative as this structure that invites teams to build and grow Stylus would help drive adoption even further.

[Tally] Delegate to Voter Enfranchisement Pool — Event Horizon

Voted: FOR

We maintained our support from Snapshot unto the onchain vote.

[Snapshot] [Aave DAO] LTIPP Grant Extension Request

Voted: AGAINST

We voted against it for the same reasons as we did with Pyth Network.

[Snapshot] Constitutional AIP: Proposal to adopt Timeboost, a new transaction ordering policy

Voted: Collect Bids in ETH

We supported the initiative to collect bids in ETH as that would give us more freedom to decide on what exactly we would want to do with the bids in the future.

[Snapshot] Terms of Tenure for STEP program manager

Voted: Additional funds for one year

We were in favor of giving these additional funds to allow the program manager to complete their original terms of service. This way, we can evaluate work done appropriately at the end of the service.

[Snapshot] ArbitrumDAO Off-site

Voted: Online Event

We supported starting with an online event, and then building from there.

[Snapshot] GovHack Devcon in Bangkok - Hack Humanity

Voted: FOR

Previous iterations have had good impact so we were pleased with supporting it.

[Snapshot] [Non-Constitutional] Funds to Bolster Foundation’s Strategic Partnerships Budget

Voted: FOR

We are pleased with the work being done by the FDN so we were happy to support this proposal to fund strategic partnerships.

[Snapshot] [Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum DAO Delegate Incentive Program

Voted: FOR - DIP V1.5

We were in favor of v1.5 as it brings a more robust methodology for gauging true delegate involvement and commitment.

25

[Snapshot] [Non-Constitutional] Whitelist Infura Nova Validator

Voted: Whitelist Infura Validator

With the expertise the team at Infura has, it was easy to support this proposal.

[Snapshot] Research on context and retention

Voted: FOR

We supported this proposal as it’s a net positive for the community with no overhead cost.

[Snapshot] An EIP-4824 powered daoURI for Arbitrum DAO

Voted: For - Use ENS txt records

We were in favor of this proposal as it greatly helps improve information accessibility. We were also supportive after seeing the ADPC had no fault with the prop.

[Tally] UPDATED - Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Voted: FOR

We maintained our support from the temp check.

[Tally] [NON-CONSTITUTIONAL] Arbitrum DAO Procurement Committee: Phase II Proposal

Voted: FOR

We initially supported this proposal during the temp check, so we maintained our support during the onchain vote.

[Tally] Constitutional AIP - Extend Delay on L2Time Lock

Voted: FOR

We voted in favor on Tally, maintaining our support from temp check.

[Snapshot] LTIPP Retroactive Community Funding Selections

Voted: ABSTAIN

We were supportive of the initiative but would have preferred the LTIPP council handle the process. For that reason, we abstained on Snapshot.

[Snapshot] Establishing a DAO Events Budget for 2025

Voted: FOR

This would bring more structure to the DAO so we were supportive of this proposal during the temp check.

[Tally] [Non-Constitutional] Funds to Bolster Foundation’s Strategic Partnerships Budget

Voted: FOR

We maintained our support from the temp check.

[Tally] ArbitrumDAO strategic “Off-site” (online) updated proposal

Voted: FOR

We voted in favor during the temp check and maintained that stance during the onchain vote.

[Tally] Enhancing Multichain Governance: Upgrading RARI Governance Token on Arbitrum

Voted: FOR

We maintained our support for this proposal during the onchain vote.

[Tally] [Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum DAO Delegate Incentive Program

Voted: FOR

We supported this proposal on Tally as we did during the temp check.

[Tally] Fund the Stylus Sprint

Voted: FOR

This is a good initiative we supported during the temp check so we maintained that stance for the onchain vote.

[Snapshot] (V2) Arbitrum Research & Development Collective

Voted: Funded with 1.73M USDC + Council

The ARDC team has been doing a good job so we were happy to support their continuation for another 12 months.

[Snapshot] [Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum Token Swap Pilot Program

Voted: ABSTAIN

This is a good initiative but there were some unanswered questions so we abstained during the temp check.

[Snapshot] GCP Council Re-Confirmation Vote for Tim Chang

Voted: ABSTAIN

We weren’t supportive of the original initiative so we voted to abstain during this vote on Snapshot.

[Snapshot] GCP Council Re-Confirmation Vote for John Kennedy

Voted: ABSTAIN

Same with Tim Chang, we also abstained here.

1 Like