BerlinBrew (Individual)
0xa60c47DD9bcF8a9F8ecbCEaf0F04Ef148A3A8A79
Tally Profile:
- Public Goods funding
- Improving Governance participation
- Tooling, Improving protocol decentralization
I fully truly honestly believe in decentralization. Everywhere in DeFi and in crypto. Crypto is phenomenal in that it leaves governance and steering aspects to the group of stakeholders, without any authority getting involved. It allows individuals to realize their visions and produce wealth generating apps, service providing projects, and life-changing/saving protocols - such as the Arbitrum eco-system.
However, financial independence and life improving apps are only for a few chosen ones - how many are currently invested in crypto? Under 1 % of the world’s population? To make the rich richer is not what I’m interested in. Quite the contrary. I see a great advantage in the use of crypto for the underprivileged ones, be that in my own country, Germany, as well as in developing and poorer countries around the world. Crypto as a means of payment throughout Africa would help solve many problems. I do believe it is this absolutely mandatory to give back to the community once you receive an abundance of things, in terms of finances, knowledge, or services. Help the needy ones to help themselves, is what I believe. This revelation came to me after a 2-year-long stage in Africa with residencies in Kenya and Cameroon.
I believe sharing is caring.
I equally believe reaching out to the brilliant minds that support crypto and the Arbitrum eco-system already is what could speed up things in above mentioned areas. Hence I fully support a Governance system comprised of socially-minded individuals, who simultaneously are equipped with a great mind for finances and the future of the world (no less). This system would be set up to improve communication, development of services, development of the platform and the onboarded projects and facilitate sharing of assets and services to the public, as well as crisis management, should such. crisis arise.
Sample Voting Issue 1:
- How would you vote?
Against
As a future delegate, I would vote against the Uniswap proposal in its actual state. Yes, I think a project like Uniswap may choose bounties and other ideas to attract new users to the platform at their own free will. And Flipside, as a data analyst company, which gives back to the community by offering cost-free data - I use those services myself, might have been an appropriate partner. And I feel much cares has been placed on the fairness of the deal for both sides, including transparency, openess, community involvement, and! I honestly believe I would have reached the intended goals:
‘Flipside’s value proposition begins with analytics, but its true purpose is to drive ecosystem acquisition and retention.’
But at what price?
With Flipside onboard it feels like giving Alphabet/Google or worse: Facebook/Meta the opportunity to support your project: you never know, who they drag along, and what they plan on doing with your data - selling it would be just one of my worries.
- What amendments would you make to the proposal if any?
Hence, I believe the planned partnership with Flipside would have led away from decentralization and toward a much more centralized structure and came dangerously close to giving controlling powers to one single entity. And the ensuing fight for the few seats made it very obvious what direction the proposal was about to take, benefitting already privileged ones, the Flipside stakeholders.
As a delegate I would make sure to change the proposal so that more than one partner joined.
- How would you approach the tradeoff between centralization of authority and the ability to get things done?
To protect the Arbitrum eco-system’s decentralization and independence constitutes the highest goal for me. Hence I would each give them one seat (5 for Uniswap) and I would allocate where a certain percentage of the funds had to go to. I would herewith strengthen the independence and decentralization of Uniswap.
Sample Voting Issue 2:
The FEI RARI Hack incident made me cringe. We have all been involved in exploits, hacks, and rug pulls, hence my sentiment after hearing about this was hack was: those poor souls. So much many that was invested to secure someone’s pension or livelihood, all those hard-earned tokens that were stolen, I felt for the victims.
And yes, my first reaction was, hopefully they were getting reimbursed. I remembered the last exploit I was involved in, where the criminal Devs, who stole the money, simply disappeared. It was a feeling of anger and desperation.
Generally, I lean toward full reimbursement in most cases.
Having said that as a delegate, I would look at such an terrible situation very carefully. Yes, there should be reimbursement payed out to investors. But how much would depend on the overall situation.
- Full Reimbursement
In this case I would have supported full reimbursement. It is technically and financially feasible. Plus, it was the responsibility of the protocol owners to repair a known security issue:
Quote from the Block.co: “The incident involved a common issue known as a reentrancy bug, a smart contract vulnerability that enables hackers to make repeated calls to a protocol in order to steal assets. Just a few weeks ago, two DeFi protocols on Gnosis Chain – Hundred Finance and Agave – lost customer funds amounting to more than $11 million in flash loan attacks resulting from reentrancy bugs.”
Languages I speak and write:
German (native) English (fluent), French (usable), Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Czech, Swaheli (knowledge of)
I would support Arbitrum 100%. I am not involved in any other project as a delegate, my mind is totally free of a conflict of interest. I would be exclusively responsible to Arbitrum’s community and its best interest. It would make me very proud to serve Arbitrum and its community. I’m a freelance artist, so there will be ample time to do so.
‘A rising tide lifts all boats’ (Chinese proverb)