Delegate Statement Template

Voting Rationale & Governance Calls Delegate Statements
,
1209

Name

Denaria

Wallet Address

0xF723f3f37f4a0639cE8DAA681ab1762d2DdaD485

Tally Profile URL

What Areas Are We Most Interested In Contributing To?

  • DeFi development on Arbitrum
  • Tooling, improving protocol decentralization

Secondary areas of interest:

  • Improving Governance participation
  • Security, audit readiness and risk transparency for DeFi protocols
  • Account abstraction, mobile-first UX and agent-ready infrastructure

Who We Are

Denaria is building mobile-first perpetual trading infrastructure on Arbitrum.

Our product direction is shaped by a simple belief: onchain trading should become easier to access without hiding the risks that make DeFi powerful and dangerous at the same time. Denaria focuses on perpetual trading UX, liquidity and liquidation mechanics, efficiency (powered by Stylus), risk explainability, account abstraction, and agent-ready workflows where users can understand, simulate and approve actions with clearer boundaries.

Why ArbitrumDAO Matters To Denaria

Arbitrum is not only an execution layer for Denaria. It is the ecosystem where the protocol can become safer, more composable and more useful.

For a DeFi trading product, the underlying network matters because liquidity, security, incentives, account abstraction infrastructure, audit support, governance decisions and treasury programs all shape the product users experience. ArbitrumDAO gives builders a way to participate in those decisions publicly and contribute practical feedback from the application layer.

Denaria wants to participate as a builder delegate focused on the perspective of DeFi products that need:

  • deep and sustainable liquidity;
  • transparent incentive design;
  • strong security practices;
  • better onboarding for non-crypto-native users;
  • account abstraction and passkey-based UX;
  • reliable oracle, liquidation and risk infrastructure;
  • measurable traction rather than vanity activity.

Overall Goals For The DAO

We believe ArbitrumDAO should keep optimizing for long-term ecosystem quality rather than short-term activity spikes.

Incentives can be useful, but they should be tied to durable outcomes: retained users, liquidity quality, protocol safety, developer adoption, composability and measurable network effects. Arbitrum has an opportunity to become the default environment for serious DeFi builders who need low-cost execution, mature infrastructure, transparent governance and credible security support.

We would generally support DAO initiatives that:

  • help high-quality builders ship and stay on Arbitrum;
  • make DeFi more understandable and usable without weakening trust assumptions;
  • support Stylus adoption where it creates clear performance or developer-experience advantages;
  • improve security through audits, monitoring and transparent post-deployment practices;
  • improve governance participation and reduce voter apathy;
  • allocate treasury resources with clear accountability, milestones and public reporting.

We would be more cautious toward initiatives that:

  • subsidize activity without a path to retention;
  • concentrate too much discretion in a single provider or committee without oversight;
  • create opaque incentive flows;
  • reward TVL or volume without measuring user quality, risk or sustainability;
  • introduce technical complexity without clear security benefits.

Stance On Liquidity Mining And Incentives

Denaria is not against incentives. DeFi often needs carefully designed incentive programs to bootstrap markets, liquidity and integrations.

However, we believe incentive programs should be specific, measurable and time-bounded. A good program should make it possible to answer:

  • what user behavior is being encouraged;
  • whether that behavior remains after incentives decline;
  • who is accountable for reporting;
  • what risks the incentives create;
  • whether the program strengthens Arbitrum after the campaign ends.

For trading and liquidity programs, we would favor dashboards and public reporting that track retention, liquidation behavior, liquidity depth, fee generation, abnormal flows and protocol-level risk, not just headline volume.

Sample Voting Issue 1 - Centralization Of Grant Allocation

If a proposal gives one service provider excessive control over allocation and oversight, we would likely vote against it unless amended.

The problem is not that execution should be perfectly decentralized from day one. Some operational ownership is necessary for grants and growth programs to move quickly. The issue is whether the proposal has enough checks, transparency, open participation and reversibility.

We would look for amendments such as:

  • clearer mandate and limited scope;
  • transparent selection criteria;
  • public reporting requirements;
  • independent oversight;
  • conflict of interest disclosures;
  • a way to replace or rotate operators if performance is weak;
  • inclusion of competing or complementary providers where relevant.

Our default position is that operational speed is valuable, but it should not create avoidable dependency on a single vendor.

Sample Voting Issue 2 - Exploit Reimbursement

We would not support a blanket rule that every exploit should receive full reimbursement, nor a blanket rule that no exploit should ever receive reimbursement.

Our preferred approach is split and conditional reimbursement, based on the facts of the incident.

Factors we would consider:

  • whether users had a reasonable expectation of safety;
  • whether the protocol, DAO or operators were negligent;
  • whether the affected users were taking extraordinary risk;
  • whether reimbursement creates moral hazard;
  • whether the protocol has a credible post-mortem and remediation plan;
  • whether funds come from an appropriate source;
  • whether the reimbursement protects ecosystem trust without socializing reckless risk.

Denaria has direct respect for this topic because DeFi security failures are not abstract. Security should be treated as a continuous process: adversarial thinking, access control, oracle assumptions, reentrancy, front-running, delegate-call risk, edge-case testing, fuzzing, static analysis and post-deployment monitoring all matter.

Conflict Of Interest Disclosure

Denaria is a DeFi protocol building on Arbitrum and may apply for Arbitrum ecosystem programs, grants, audit support, incentives or partnerships.

If Denaria is directly involved in a proposal, grant application, incentive program or vendor relationship, we will disclose the conflict publicly and either abstain or explain why we believe participation is appropriate. We will not use delegated voting power to obscure a direct financial interest.

Voting Process

Voting decisions will be based on internal review by Denaria contributors, with attention to:

  • proposal quality;
  • ecosystem impact;
  • security and operational risk;
  • treasury accountability;
  • impact on DeFi builders and users;
  • alignment with Arbitrum’s long-term growth.

When possible, Denaria will publish voting rationales in a dedicated governance communication thread.

Languages

English and Italian.

Links

3 Likes
Denaria Governance Communication Thread