Name (organization or individual): HMX.org
Wallet Address or ENS: 0x8f27186818939f3292149983A86981582AaD0BAf
Tally Profile URL: Tally | HMXorg
What area are you most interested in contributing to? choose up to two tags:
- DeFi development on Arbitrum
- Improving Governance participation
- Supporting Infrastructure
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
The goal of the DAO at Arbitrum is to build a healthy and sustainable ecosystem through a decentralized governance mechanism. This approach empowers builders and contributors to actively participate and shape the strategic direction of the Arbitrum ecosystem. Our DAO’s goals span in multiple dimensions:
- Technical Innovation: At Arbitrum, we need a rollup which has the security, efficiency, and privacy for the ecosystem, ensuring that the infrastructure is robust and reliable for all users.
- Business and Ecosystem Growth: The expansion and utilization of the ecosystem, including ARB tokens, are central to our objectives. We aim to enhance the utility and adoption of the ecosystem, driving both growth and value creation.
- Inclusive Governance: Unlike traditional corporate structures, the DAO emphasizes democratic engagement, allowing every member’s voice to be heard. DAO’s goal is to encourage open discussions and collective decision-making, ensuring that all viewpoints are considered in shaping the future of the DAO.
- Long-Term Sustainability: Our ultimate goal is to establish an ecosystem that is not only effective in the short term but also viable and resilient over the long haul. The DAO should committed to aligning all stakeholders with the shared vision of a robust and flourishing DAO.
These goals also outline our commitment to transforming how decisions are made and executed within the Arbitrum ecosystem, ensuring it remains forward-thinking and adaptive to the needs of its community.
Please share your stance on issues that were raised previously, in other communities, as described below:
Sample Voting Issue 1:
Issue Overview 1.3k
- Uniswap planned to use Flipside to attract new users to Uniswap through bounties. Although the program outline and funding was fine, the proposal was contentious because it gave Flipside crypto too much control over allocating UNI to bounties and oversight of the entire program.
- For instance, Flipside had 3/7 seats on the allocation committee and 1/3 seats on the Oversight committee. There was also concern since none of the other analytics service providers were involved in the proposal.
- This proposal flew under the radar but at the 11th hour got very heated. Large votes from university clubs supported the proposal since they would get a seat on the allocation committee. However, Dune and Leshner spoke up about the issue because of the centralization of power and favor of one service provider.
Prompts to Answer:
-
How would you vote?
I would vote against this proposal. While the initiative to attract new users through bounties is commendable, the structure of the proposal gives a high power to Flipside Crypto, particularly in terms of bounty allocation and program oversight. This concentration of power compromises the decentralized ethos of the DAO. -
What amendments would you make to the proposal if any?
To improve the proposal, I recommend broadening the composition of both the allocation and oversight committees to include a more diverse range of participants. This could involve inviting other analytics service providers and ensuring that no single party holds a disproportionate vote. A predefined structure for committee creation, aimed at enhancing diversity and reducing conflicts of interest, should be established right from the start. -
How would you approach the tradeoff between centralization of authority and the ability to get things done?
Balancing centralization and the efficiency of operations is inherently challenging. While decentralization may complicate decision-making processes due to the involvement of multiple parties, it is essential for maintaining the integrity and democratic nature of a DAO. Emphasizing transparency and open dialogue can mitigate these complications. It’s important that all contributors align towards the collective goals of the DAO, ensuring that the focus remains on the community’s interest rather than individual gain. This approach fosters a more collaborative environment and ultimately drives more effective and equitable decision-making.
Sample Voting Issue 2:
Issue Overview:
Overview Link 1 3.6k
Overview Link 2 498
FEI RARI Hack Reimbursement: In April 2022 Rari was hacked for 80M, a vote was passed to reimburse those affected. Then in May 2022 another vote to refund the Rari hacked was brought forward this time it was not passed.
Prompts to Answer:
Outside the flipping of the vote, how would you choose to handle this situation?
In response to the FEI RARI Hack, I suggest a Split Reimbursement strategy. This approach offers partial compensation to those affected, which helps preserve the DAO’s financial reserves while still supporting community members. It also mitigates the risk of moral concerns by emphasizing shared responsibility between the platform and its users. Additionally, involving the community in the decision-making process ensures transparency and aligns with collective interests. Establishing a consistent policy for partial reimbursements also sets a sustainable precedent for managing similar situations in the future, ensuring the ecosystem remains resilient.
Languages I speak and write: English
Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:
I am a team member at HMXorg, a perpetual protocol operating on Arbitrum. Our goals align with the growth and enhancement of our product, which directly contributes to the development of the Arbitrum ecosystem.