Name (organization)
DSPYT (dspyt.com)
Wallet Address
0x4C11BA2ed1D936d769d0cce34CbC7Ea1E85182d0
Tally Profile URL
What area are you most interested in contributing to? choose up to two tags:
Improving Governance participation
Supporting Infrastructure
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
We are committed to enhancing the effectiveness and inclusivity of governance processes. By increasing participation and supporting essential infrastructure, we aim to help build a more resilient and responsive DAO. We believe in fostering a decentralized and transparent governance model that empowers all community members.
Our focus is on ensuring the long-term sustainability and success of the Arbitrum network through active community involvement and robust infrastructure development.
The primary goal of the DAO should be to build sustainable value and utility in the network rather than merely attracting short-term speculative interest. Therefore, our strategy would involve selective and strategic use of liquidity mining, aligned with the broader objective of long-term network growth and stability.
Sample Voting Issue 1:
How would you vote?
Against
What amendments would you make to the proposal if any?
We would suggest revisiting the proposal to ensure it aligns better with the principles of decentralization and community participation. Specific amendments could include:
Ensuring the Oversight Committee is run by reputable and independent DAO members to maintain a system of checks and balances. The party being overseen should not have a vote on its own Oversight Committee, as this compromises the integrity of the oversight process. For example, in a past proposal, one of the committee votes was held by an individual whose venture capital firm was an investor in the program being overseen. This type of conflict of interest should be avoided.
Creating a service provider-neutral framework to avoid favoritism and ensure that a wide range of analytics providers can compete fairly. This approach was suggested by Dune Analytics in a similar context and aligns with our goal of inclusivity and fairness.
How would you approach the tradeoff between centralization of authority and the ability to get things done?
While centralization can sometimes expedite decision-making, it often undermines the core values of a DAO. We advocate for a balanced approach where efficient governance structures are in place, but not at the expense of broad community engagement and representation.
Sample Voting Issue 2:
Outside the flipping of the vote, how would you choose to handle this situation?
i.e should parties be reimbursed for an exploit or not? (Please choose one of the below options and then elaborate upon your reasoning)
Split Reimbursement
We believe that a split reimbursement approach is the most balanced and fair way to address such situations. Full reimbursement can create a moral hazard, encouraging less diligence in security practices if parties expect to be fully bailed out, the position of the DAO would be weakened. Conversely, no reimbursement at all can be excessively punitive and harm the trust and engagement of the community.
Instances When Reimbursement is Appropriate:
Severe Exploits with Broad Impact: When an exploit significantly affects a large number of users and the overall trust in the network, partial reimbursement can help restore confidence and support community stability.
Clear Governance Failure: If the exploit occurred due to a clear failure in the DAO’s governance or security protocols, partial reimbursement acknowledges the shared responsibility.
Instances When Reimbursement is Not Appropriate:
Negligence or Malpractice: If the exploit resulted from negligence or malpractice by specific parties, reimbursement should be withheld to emphasize the importance of best practices and accountability.
Minor or Isolated Incidents: Smaller exploits affecting a limited number of users may not warrant reimbursement, particularly if the cost of reimbursement would disproportionately burden the DAO.
Languages I speak and write: English, Russian, Spanish a bit
Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:
No conflicts of interest to disclose