zol1966
0x854bD703084706dF2777557659417b76E9FC3BEB
- Supporting Infrastructure
- IRL Arbitrum community gatherings
Against
Split Reimbursement
Русский
1 Like
-
Name:
Gabriel.ferst - twitter -
Wallet Anddress or ENS:
0xdE89908F81C64356aD66cB919b9d699168E773Be -
Tally Profile URL: @Gbrlbf
Tally | @Gbrlbf -
What area are you most interested in contributing to? choose up tot wo tags:
- DeFi development on Arbitrum
- NFT development on Arbitrum
- Supporting Infrastructure -
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
- Liquidity mining is a popular strategy used by DAOs to incentivize liquidity providers and reward community members for contributing to the platform. The aggressiveness of liquidity mining can depend on a DAO’s goals and risk tolerance. A more aggressive approach to liquidity mining may lead to faster growth, but it may also increase volatility and risk.
- I do not care about liquidity mining. Bribing people to use X means X is useless. We aggressively build stuff that people NEED instead. -
Sample Voting Issue 1:
Against
No amendments, just cancel it altogether.
The solution is reputational avatars, which solves most if not all DAO participation and token-weight voting problems.
-
Sample Voting Issue 2:
It depends entirely where the reimbursement would come from. If this were a case of introducing a self-executable on-chain transfer block on the hacked amount and reminting into the damaged parties’ accounts, I would vote yes. If the tokenholders and other network participants were to pay for this, no. Socializing losses across a large number of people is not acceptable when it is clear that very small circles of people are responsible for both insecure code and stealing the money. -
Languages I speak and write:
English,Portugues
- Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:
no conflicts of interest
1 Like
Name
Jakraphan
Wallet
0x158d2F03b08B761320a32f2D1eAaBBfCC6680735
Tally Profile
Tally
What area are you most interested in contributing to?
- Tooling, Improving protocol decentralization
- DeFi development on Arbitrum
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
- DAO is a most important element in our WEB 3.0. it is the future. Real decentralization and security and decisions DAO participants make.
Sample Voting Issue 1:
- Against
- The balance of voting power should be guaranteed. We seek decentralization.
- Initial equal and fair distribution between active participants, more power for useful for DAO actions. Strong DAO participants will be able to keep DAO healthy.
Sample Voting Issue 2:
- Split Reimbursement
Based on contribution, parties involvement, and available funds. Maybe yes but with vesting. Split reimbursement can help in such envinronment.
Languages I speak and write:
- English, Thai
Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:
- no conflicts
3 Likes
Bananachain
0x14C4D828FcE99eA4CabB802CFe10F22090B4CbC9
Areas most interested in contributing to:
- Public Goods funding
- DeFi development on Arbitrum
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
Building and maintaining revenues stream to support a healthy and vibrant community.
Establish propper accounting to monitor the revenue streams.
Closely monitor the evolving regulatory environment.
Please share your stance on issues that were raised previously, in other communities, as described below:
Sample Voting Issue 1: Uniswap/Flipside
Prompts to Answer:
- How would you vote?
For
- What amendments would you make to the proposal if any?
Depending on the current bylaws one could think of the vote of the chair counting double or having a veto power.
- How would you approach the tradeoff between centralization of authority and the ability to get things done?
The issue is not one of centralisation as this necessary to conduct meaningful decissions to which one was mandated by the community, rather how good are the checks and balances in place, which would depend on the bylaws. In the case of the oversight committee Flipside had only 1 of three seats. Unless unanimity is required, this would safeguard interests of the majority holders. Similar for the allocation committee. Additional solution could be as in 2. above.
Sample Voting Issue 2: FEI RARI Hack Reimbursement
Prompts to Answer:
Outside the flipping of the vote, how would you choose to handle this situation?
Should parties be reimbursed for an exploit or not?
- Full Reimbursement
Please elaborate on what instances you believe it is right to refund and which are not:
A vote passed, therefore full reimbursement should be honoured.
However, a full reimbursement should not occure in the event that it would
1, threaten the existence of the protocol, or
2. the reasons for the hack are due to forces the protocol could not control or reasonably forsee given duty of care; or
3. the hack was facilitated by third party vulnerabilities used in the protocol for which they would be liable (would need to take recourse first and, if successful could consider redistribution).
Languages I speak and write:
English
Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:
none
3 Likes
Name: ishan (Individual)
ENS: 0x953bF7BE84C5B30c670E19cEB2673564f8C99166
Tally: [Tally | 0x953bF7BE84C5B30c670E19cEB2673564f8C99166
Areas of interest:
- Public goods funding
- DeFi development on Arbitrum
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
First and foremost, the purpose of a DAO is to allow for the healthy and decentralised development of the rollup. This vision, of course, can entail many different aspects, from the more technical and security focused sections of the rollup (which the DAO should have oversight over) to encouraging the development of a healthy ecosystem and growth with the ARB token. Basically, every decision the DAO makes should return to the question: ’ How does this benefit the long-term sustainability and success of not just the ARB token, but also the broader future of rollups?’ .
From this question we can begin exploring different roles that the DAO could assume in the broader Arbitrum ecosystem, and the careful balancing act that follows for each decision. Some examples include:
- Technical protocol and security upgrades: If arbitrum truly wants to be community owned, they need to have an oversight over what the protocol will develop into and all the layers that are part of the Arbitrum ecosystem. However, the average voter will probably not be knowledgeable enough to vote in good faith on whether a development will be fruitful or not. One potential solution that could be explored is a technical subcommittee in charge of overseeing this side of governance, which ultimately might report back to the wider DAO. The DAO is already planning to do this with the Security Council, but this same idea could be implemented in other technical areas.
- Liquidity Mining - While this strategy can assist for the short-term growth and user acquisition on the protocols selected for these campaigns, it should not be seen as a permanent fixture of any protocol. Liquidity mining serves as a great opportunity for someone to get acquainted somewhere new in search of the yield, but if subsidised too long by the Arbitrum DAO, it could lead to an unhealthy subsidy of protocols through unsustainable emissions.
- Grants - While liquidity mining handles growing users and technical committees handle the rollup itself, grants are the greatest part of the DAO that will target builders. Grants have to be handled carefully, as they have a degree of social trust needed both from the DAO and the builders. Builders have to be able to demonstrate deliverables for the amount and accountability. Despite the complications, grants will allow for the development of tools and dApps that the space might need, but currently might not be as profitable.
These are just some examples of DAO goals, but of course there are endless more possibilities on what might be handled!
Sample Voting Issue 1 - UniSwap/Flipside Bounty
How would you vote?
For
Delegation of voting power is necessary for any DAO to be able to function efficiently in the long term. Even though it brings a degree of centralisation, as long as they do not control an excessive amount of the larger DAO and they have sufficient accountability measures it’s a good initiative.
What amendments would you make to the proposal if any?
- Separate the grants into quarterly distributions: For an allocation as large as 25 Million, I don’t believe that it is wise to simply divide it into Year 1 and Year 2. I understand that half of it was going to employing staff so they would rather have the reserve upfront, but considering that the only upside of delivering such amounts once a year is saving some time on transactions and communications, it feels that dividing the allocations into at least quarterly separations would’ve been wiser.
- Introduce checkpoints across the delegation period: In addition to having a committee handling immediate matters related to the grant, it would’ve been preferable to also introduce routine votes to ensure that the DAO was still comfortable with such a large allocation. This would have also encouraged the grantee to increase accountability and deliver accountability reports.
How would you approach the tradeoff between centralization of authority and the ability to get things done?
It’s inevitable that effectiveness and decentralisation are inversely proportional. As long as the centralised entities are still ultimately dependent on the DAOs approval, and they operate as transparently as possible, this is a necessary tool for the development of the DAO.
A DAO should consider having centralising points only when specialists are required to act knowledgeable and quickly, something which the Vox Populi of the DAO might struggle with. The entities to do this should be trusted members of the space of course.
Sample Voting Issue 2 - Rari Hack Reinbursement
Outside the flipping of the vote, how would you choose to handle this situation?
Please elaborate on what instances you believe it is right to refund and which are not.
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
Hacks and loss of funds are to this day one of the strongest blockers we have from people trusting the space and onboarding onto it. Every time a large draining of protocol contracts occurs, the idea of the Financial Legos gets threatened, as people become less and less willing to risk connecting with other protocols.
For this reason, I believe at least a partial reinbursement is always to be considered when a protocol has decided to cooperate with you. These parties decided to entrust the security of your smart contracts, and their dedication and trust that was placed onto the protocol should be thanked by at least trying to provide some funds back. In the future, this could even be handled with DAO insurance protocols, which are already being developed in the space.
However, I would be hesitant to provide a full reinbursement when the hack has already severely impacted the protocol so badly. If the amount won’t make that much of a difference to the bottom line it makes sense to give a reinbursement, but in this particular case the double impact of the hack was so severe that this lead to one of the first instances of a DAO explicitly closing doors. A full reinbursement , in terms of impact, would be the same as a second equally devastating hack.
TL;DR Provide enough compensation to thank the participants for engaging in the system, but while a full reinbursement might help these stakeholders, the impact of this action could lead to the DAO entering a negative death spiral.
Languages I speak and write: By order of preference - English, Spanish, Italian
Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:
Currently, I am spending most of my time working on the ParaSwap DAO. This means that I will automatically abstain from any discussion that might involve DEX Aggregation, as my opinion will obviously be biased. The positive side of this participation is that ParaSwap is also deployed in Arbitrum, which means that the success of Arbitrum will also positively impact ParaSwap (through increased liquidity sources and volumes), as well as vice versa (by encouraging efficiency and decentralisation of liquidity in the rollup by aggregating all of these together through a single, simple to access interface).
Additionaly, I also applied to be a delegate on the Optimism collective, which although is also part of the wider ethereum ecosystem it could be considered a conflict of interest. Currently, I am being allocated ~ 1k OP. In addition to this, ParaSwap has also been selected as one of the Protocol Delegate Scheme recipients, and if necessary, the representative of ParaSwap could be a different DAO member if this is considered a major conflict of interest. Personally, I believe that the growth of any decentralised rollup on the Ethereum ecosystem is a net positive for everyone in the space, and I will do my best to lend my knowledge in bettering the entire space 
3 Likes
Name
Mayuree
Wallet
0xBD1F7a92b1D70014d8E3e696AcbE271cD2337a52
Tally Profile
Tally
What area are you most interested in contributing to?
- Tooling, Improving protocol decentralization
- DeFi development on Arbitrum
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
- DAO is a most important element in our WEB 3.0. it is the future. Real decentralization and security and decisions DAO participants make.
Sample Voting Issue 1:
- Against
- The balance of voting power should be guaranteed. We seek decentralization.
- Initial equal and fair distribution between active participants, more power for useful for DAO actions. Strong DAO participants will be able to keep DAO healthy.
Sample Voting Issue 2:
- Split Reimbursement
Based on contribution, parties involvement, and available funds. Maybe yes but with vesting. Split reimbursement can help in such envinronment.
Languages I speak and write:
- English, Thai
Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:
- no conflicts
2 Likes
Name (organization or individual)
chg
Wallet Address or ENS
0x98Ed9809bbFbfc0d4B46357A7360bf0Fcffd5ecb
Tally Profile URL (create a profile here 21)
Tally | chg.eth
What area are you most interested in contributing to?
NFT development on Arbitrum
Improving Governance participation
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
I do not care about liquidity mining. Bribing people to use X means X is useless. We aggressively build stuff that people NEED instead.
Sample Voting Issue 1:
Against
No amendments, just cancel it altogether.
The solution is reputational avatars, which solves most if not all DAO participation and token-weight voting problems.
Sample Voting Issue 2:
It depends entirely where the reimbursement would come from. If this were a case of introducing a self-executable on-chain transfer block on the hacked amount and reminting into the damaged parties’ accounts, I would vote yes. If the tokenholders and other network participants were to pay for this, no. Socializing losses across a large number of people is not acceptable when it is clear that very small circles of people are responsible for both insecure code and stealing the money.
Languages I speak and write:
English.
Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:
no conflicts of interest
4 Likes
Name
ishan
Wallet
0x953bF7BE84C5B30c670E19cEB2673564f8C99166
Tally Profile
0x953bF7BE84C5B30c670E19cEB2673564f8C99166
What area are you most interested in contributing to?
- Tooling, Improving protocol decentralization
- DeFi development on Arbitrum
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
- DAO is a most important element in our WEB 3.0. it is the future. Real decentralization and security and decisions DAO participants make.
Sample Voting Issue 1:
- Against
- The balance of voting power should be guaranteed. We seek decentralization.
- Initial equal and fair distribution between active participants, more power for useful for DAO actions. Strong DAO participants will be able to keep DAO healthy.
Sample Voting Issue 2:
- Split Reimbursement
Based on contribution, parties involvement, and available funds. Maybe yes but with vesting. Split reimbursement can help in such envinronment.
Languages I speak and write:
- English,
Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:
- no conflicts
2 Likes
Name
Teerapong
Wallet
0x7CD95B39AA3EA6dFAB7648e5c6dcd9045C7ddF82
Tally Profile
Tally
What area are you most interested in contributing to?
- Tooling, Improving protocol decentralization
- DeFi development on Arbitrum
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
- DAO is a most important element in our WEB 3.0. it is the future. Real decentralization and security and decisions DAO participants make.
Sample Voting Issue 1:
- Against
- The balance of voting power should be guaranteed. We seek decentralization.
- Initial equal and fair distribution between active participants, more power for useful for DAO actions. Strong DAO participants will be able to keep DAO healthy.
Sample Voting Issue 2:
- Split Reimbursement
Based on contribution, parties involvement, and available funds. Maybe yes but with vesting. Split reimbursement can help in such envinronment.
Languages I speak and write:
- English, Thai
Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:
- no conflicts
3 Likes
Name Daniel
Wallet Address 0xf62AaE2Bf6811C132271C87595cf9BFEf1E9B7ce
**Tally Profile ** Tally | dannyblck
What area are you most interested in contributing to? choose up tot wo tags:
- DeFi development on Arbitrum
- Gaming development on Arbitrum
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
In my opinion, finding the right balance between aggressive and conservative approaches to liquidity mining is crucial for the DAO. On the one hand, we need to be aggressive enough to attract more users and projects to the ecosystem, but on the other hand, we should also prioritize a long-term perspective to ensure sustainability and stability.
Sample Voting Issue 1:
Issue Overview
- How would you vote?
Against
- What amendments would you make to the proposal if any?
The main objective of a DAO should be to foster diversity of opinions and participants. If power becomes centralized within a small group, the DAO loses its purpose and becomes nothing more than a collection of individuals. To prevent this, it can be helpful to establish committees and set clear membership criteria from the outset, with the aim of promoting diversity and avoiding conflicts of interest. By doing so, the DAO can ensure that decision-making is distributed across a wide range of perspectives, allowing it to function as a truly decentralized and inclusive organization.
- How would you approach the tradeoff between centralization of authority and the ability to get things done?
It’s often said that decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) can be challenging to govern because of the diversity of views and opinions involved. However, I believe that committees or delegates can play a vital role in representing the voices of many and streamlining the governance processes. While it’s true that greater decentralization can make it harder to reach consensus, having a representative group to help manage decision-making can enhance the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the DAO. By empowering committees or delegates to act on behalf of the wider community, DAOs can strike a balance between decentralization and practicality, ensuring that everyone’s opinions are heard and valued.
Sample Voting Issue 2:
Issue Overview:
Overview Link 1
Overview Link 2
- Split Reimbursement
A DAO has a responsibility to create a favorable environment for its members and to ensure their survival. However, in the event of a hack, the appropriate response will depend on the circumstances and severity of the attack. It may not always be possible for the DAO to fully reimburse members if their funds have been drained.
In such cases, I believe that the best course of action is to consider returning money to those affected, potentially using a vesting system or other means of ensuring that funds are distributed fairly. Alternatively, the DAO could take proactive steps to protect the interests of its members by implementing stricter security measures and actively investigating any security breaches. Ultimately, the DAO should prioritize the needs and wellbeing of its members above all else, and work to find solutions that are equitable, transparent, and effective.
Languages I speak and write: English, Russian, Kazakh
Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest: No conflict of interest
2 Likes
Name (organisation or individual):
0xMonke at ZigZag Labs
Wallet Address or ENS:
0x8cCf7C95C0C8EE89d3662b315bAfEc929464dee7
Tally Profile URL:
Areas of interest for contribution:
DeFi Development on Arbitrum
Supporting Infrastructure
Stance on overall goals for the DAO:
From my standpoint, the DAO should strike a judicious balance between bold liquidity mining to attract users and projects, whilst preserving long-term sustainability and network stability. The primary aim of the DAO should be fostering innovation and empowering the community.
Sample Voting Issue 1:
Vote inclination: Against
Suggested amendments to the proposal:
I propose that the allocation and oversight committees be restructured to be more decentralised, incorporating representatives from a diverse array of analytics service providers, ensuring impartial distribution and supervision.
Approach to the tradeoff between centralisation of authority and efficiency in execution:
I advocate for a more decentralised approach, ensuring that decisions are made collectively. Concurrently, it is crucial to empower specialised working groups for handling specific tasks with efficacy.
Sample Voting Issue 2:
Preferred method to address the situation: Split Reimbursement
How would you choose to handle this situation:
I contend that reimbursement considerations ought to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. In scenarios where the project team exhibits negligence or malicious intent, reimbursement should be withheld.
If the team has demonstrated due diligence and the hack/exploit was unforeseeable, a partial reimbursement could be contemplated to support the affected parties whilst distributing the responsibility equitably.
Languages I proficiently speak and write:
- English
Declaration of Conflict(s) of Interest: I hereby affirm that I possess no conflicts of interest that could hinder me from exercising my best judgment in furthering the interests of the Arbitrum ecosystem. As a delegate, my priority will be the overall well-being and expansion of the Arbitrum community, even if it necessitates setting aside personal or organisational interests.
2 Likes
Name (organization or individual) ultra
Wallet Address or ENS 0x539629494be6b004d33d290E6243806750A3A2f4
Tally Profile Tally | ultra
What area are you most interested in contributing to? choose up tot wo tags:
- Public Goods funding
- DeFi development on Arbitrum
- Improving Governance participation
- Supporting Infrastructure
- Tooling, Improving protocol decentralization
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
The DAO should focus on selectively directing incentives to areas which are currently lacking or missing on Arbitrum chain as well as incubating new exciting protocols. Arbitrum should strive to create the most diverse, unique and useful ecosystem and incentives are a great tool for this. Arbitrum projects so far have been extremely collaborative with minimal pvp behaviour; we must try to protect this kind of environment.
Sample Voting Issue 1:
- How would you vote?
Against - What amendments would you make to the proposal if any?
No amendments - How would you approach the tradeoff between centralization of authority and the ability to get things done?
Introduction of more layers of delegation and committees can help decentralise voting while maintaining the interests of the DAO. Recurring elections and minimum activity requirements would also ensure delegates maintain their duties.
Sample Voting Issue 2:
-
Outside the flipping of the vote, how would you choose to handle this situation?
Full Reimbursement
I was personally affected by the FEI hack and understand how affected people felt. It is important for delegates to vote for whatever the majority of people want and uphold their interests, so a full reimbursement is the right choice.
Languages I speak and write: English
Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:
For the past 1+ year I have spent most of my time launching and scaling Jones DAO on the engineering side and have a number of advisory and seed relationships in various protocols that can be discussed privately.
3 Likes
**Name - Victor Okeke
**Wallet Address - 0xCCf4CFFBE329bB48450d7DE34118fB6D9B4814d3
**Tally Profile URL - https://www.tally.xyz/profile/0xccf4cffbe329bb48450d7de34118fb6d9b4814d3
What area are you most interested in contributing to? choose up to two tags:
- DeFi development on Arbitrum
- NFT development on Arbitrum
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
eg — how aggressive should we be in liquidity mining, what is the goal of the DAO? The aggressiveness of liquidity mining should be determined by careful consideration of the DAO’s goals, risk tolerance, and long-term sustainability. It’s important to strike a balance between incentivizing liquidity providers and maintaining a healthy token economy.
Please share your stance on issues that were raised previously, in other communities, as described below:
Sample Voting Issue 1:
Issue Overview
- 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? For
- What amendments would you make to the proposal if any? None
- How would you approach the tradeoff between centralization of authority and the ability to get things done? Ultimately, the key to finding the right balance between centralization and decentralization is to approach the tradeoff with a flexible mindset and a willingness to adapt as circumstances change.
Sample Voting Issue 2:
Issue Overview:
Overview Link 1
Overview Link 2
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?
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
**Languages I speak and write: English
Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:
Diversity of opinions is critical to making progress and determining the future direction of the
Arbitrum ecosystem. We recognize and celebrate the fact that delegates will have diverse views and we both encourage and anticipate good-faith debates in the governance process. That being said, it’s critical that all featured delegates are operating with Arbitrum’s best interest in mind, so please affirm that you don’t have any conflicts of interest that would prevent you from using your best judgement to operate in the best interests of advancing the Arbitrum ecosystem.
[/quote]
11 Likes
Name: Mykola Babanin
Wallet Address: 0x2a39c80c5DD5669028fcc012926cBBC86B1C383d
Tally Profile URL: https://www.tally.xyz/profile/0x2a39c80c5dd5669028fcc012926cbbc86b1c383dAreas Areas of interest:
- Dedi evelopment on Arbitrum
- Public Goods funding
- Supporting Infrastructure
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
The goals of a DAO and the approach to liquidity mining should be aligned with the needs and priorities of its community. DAOs can benefit from incorporating feedback and input from community members to ensure that their strategies and goals reflect the values and interests of the wider ecosystem.
Sample Voting Issue 1: - Against
- No amendments, just cancel it altogether.
- The solution is [reputational avatars], which solves most if not all DAO participation and token-weight voting problems.
Sample Voting Issue 2:
It depends entirely where the reimbursement would come from. If this were a case of introducing a self-executable on-chain transfer block on the hacked amount and reminting into the damaged parties’ accounts, I would vote yes. If the tokenholders and other network participants were to pay for this, no. Socializing losses across a large number of people is not acceptable when it is clear that very small circles of people are responsible for both insecure code and stealing the money.
It would depend on the specific circumstances of the hack and the impact on the affected parties. In general, it is important to balance the needs of the affected parties with the overall health and sustainability of the project. Full reimbursement may not always be feasible or sustainable, but partial reimbursement or other forms of compensation may be appropriate in certain cases. Ultimately, any decision should be made with transparency and community input to ensure fairness and accountability
Languages I speak and write:ukrainian and learning english
Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:
I am confident that I have no conflicts of interest that would not allow me to perform my role in the best possible way.
3 Likes
Name (organization or individual) ENO
Wallet Address or ENS 0x000000FE532a821196A4664208Ae7B61513B243E
Improving Governance participation
Supporting Infrastructure
Tooling, Improving protocol decentralization
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
Ensure the decentralization of DAO, and maintain the fairness and freedom of the public chain. On this basis, complete the expansion task of the Ethereum community, improve the development of infrastructure, and maintain the ecological prosperity of ARB
Sample Voting Issue 1:
How would you vote?
Against
What amendments would you make to the proposal if any?
No amendments, just cancel it altogether.
Sample Voting Issue 2:
Issue Overview
Prompts to Answer:
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
Ensuring the liquidity of the treasury is conducive to the development of DAO, and reimbursement in installments can also increase users’ attention to the product, so I will choose reimbursement in installments. If no one proposes this plan, I will propose it.
Languages I speak and write: Chinese 、 English
Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:
no conflicts of interest
3 Likes
Name (organization or individual)
PHP memorial foundation
Wallet Address or ENS
isat.ETH
Tally Profile URL (create a profile here )
What area are you most interested in contributing to? choose up tot wo tags:
- Public Goods funding
- Tooling, Improving protocol decentralization
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
-
Attract users, providing with their the starting gas, and convert them, measured by a high retention rate (aim for 25%+ - The Uniswap Airdrop - Lessons for the Industry)
-
Find the balance for pseudo-anonymity but provide a cosy one
-
Test out the strategy of co-growing with AI.
**Please share your stance on issues that were raised previously, in other communities, as described below:
Bankless is built because of its co-founders provided discussions
FWB is built to serve artists getting things done
-
Arbitrum is built to provide affordable access to Ethereum eco-system.
-
Arbitrum will thrive if it provides better connectivity to other protocols (Bitcoin as protocol for value, Lens for social data, airbnb for property liquidity) and eco-systems like GPT
-
Arbitrum will shine if it invest into traditional education and online education
-
Arbitrum will succeed if we support good games - be it Olympic games or 0xsmolbrain words3.xyz
-
Arbitrum will survive if we figure out how to reconcile between geo-political conflicts - maybe focus on small-ish countries or new experiments like Talent City (Itana)
1 Like
Name : Everyone calls me Liviu and I have add a C
Address or ENS: sibiu.eth
Discord username : LiviuC#7835
Verification (Tally profile or tweet): Tally | sibiu.eth
What area are you most interested in contributing to? choose up tot wo tags:
- Public Goods funding
- DeFi development on Arbitrum
- NFT development on Arbitrum
- Improving Governance participation
- Tooling, Improving protocol decentralization
- IRL Arbitrum community gatherings
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
Sample Voting Issue 1:
Prompts to Answer:
- How would you vote?
Against - What amendments would you make to the proposal if any?
Will revisit the proposal and try push for more diversity and for 1 entity - 1 seat. - How would you approach the trade-off between centralization of authority and the ability to get things done?
I see that token weight voting is causing problems and centralize and lean the balance into the whales favor.
Sample Voting Issue 2:
Outside the flipping of the vote, how would you choose to handle this situation?
- Split Reimbursement
The DAO should ensure the best environment for its members while also considering their survival. Therefore, depending on type of hack, draining their funds to pay is not a good approach. Instead, the DAO can return the money to those affected, perhaps under a vesting system, or work to look after the interests of its users long term.
Languages I speak and write:
English, Romanian, a little bit of German and Hungarian.
Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:
None.
1 Like
Name : Princemovic
Wallet Address or ENS : Princemovic.eth
Tally Profile URL : Princemovic
I am most interested in DeFi development on Arbitrum and Improving Governance participation.
I run a DAO and I would do my best to introduce them and be a great ambassador promoting products from arbitrum.
Liquidity mining is a popular strategy used by DAOs to incentivize liquidity providers and reward community members for contributing to the platform. The aggressiveness of liquidity mining can depend on a DAO’s goals and risk tolerance. A more aggressive approach to liquidity mining may lead to faster growth, but it may also increase volatility and risk.
Previous issues raised in other communities can vary widely, but some common ones include concerns about transparency, governance, and security. DAOs can address these issues by implementing transparent decision-making processes, strong security protocols, and community-driven governance structures.
What amendments would you make to the proposal if any?
Introduce checkpoints across the delegation period: In addition to having a committee handling immediate matters related to the grant, it would’ve been preferable to also introduce routine votes to ensure that the DAO was still comfortable with such a large allocation.
2 Likes
Name (organization or individual)
Dennison Bertram (Individual)
Wallet Address or ENS
0x0610623d8E9ac26BAC3E53b9144d6E46d60691d1
Tally Profile URL (create a profile here )
What area are you most interested in contributing to? choose up to two tags:
- Public Goods funding
- Tooling, Improving protocol decentralization
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
Liquidity mining is an important part of the decentralization process of a DAO. However, if done poorly with incentives for trivial, unimportant actions without long term alignment, it can easily become a net negative for the DAO and saddle the DAO with a large pool of disinterested, short term speculators.
Liquidity mining should be heavily weighted toward builders that bring value to the ecosystem. Builders can be technical, or non-technical, but again, it is important to screen for true value creation and balance it with the goals of long term decentralization.
The goal of the DAO should be to ensure the long term success of Arbitrum, expanding the reach and adoption of Arbitrum technology and to fund public goods built around the ecosystem.
The DAO should have a bias towards action.
Sample Voting Issue 1:
Issue Overview
Prompts to Answer:
- How would you vote?
Abstain
In this case, I was personally related to the parties involved in the proposal. Because of this, and my strong belief in transparency and clarity on conflicts of interest, I would abstain on this issue.
- What amendments would you make to the proposal if any?
If I were to improve the proposal, I would have suggested to include more tools for transparency and oversight on the process. I would have looked to take the various perspectives of the parties involved and tried to find a compromise that would further the goals of the proposal and help convince those who disagreed that it was a net positive for the ecosystem.
- How would you approach the tradeoff between centralization of authority and the ability to get things done?
The centralization of authority in limited amounts can be a net positive for the efficient of a DAO. However, this centralization of authority must be balanced by effective tools and transparency that allows the token holders to hold accountable those that are in positions of authority. There are many such tools coming available on the market now, so I think it’s reasonable that with a bias towards action, we could implement tooling solutions that can allow for efficient operation of a DAO, but without falling victim to capture and centralization.
Sample Voting Issue 2:
Issue Overview:
Overview Link 1
Overview Link 2
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 this case I was an investor in one of the organizations attempting to get reimbursed, so I must decline to answer this example directly.
However on the general point of reimbursement, I am inclined to feel that DeFi Protocols should socialize losses as best as possible, minimizing the chance that any one participant in the ecosystem is overly harmed in the event of a hack or loss of funds. Of course this is dependent on the circumstances of the event, but while this space is still young and evolving, we should do our best to try and protect the vulnerable participants in the ecosystem from harm when possible and reasonable. This will not always be the case, or might not always be my perspective, but I’d like to err on the side of supporting users.
Languages I speak and write:
English
Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:
I am the CEO and Co-Founder of Tally.xyz. This means i am privy to a variety of early information about DAOs and events in the DAO ecosystem. This also means Tally is at times a recipient of grants from DAO’s. Because of this, I pledge to refrain from participating in votes that I would have a clear conflict of interest in.I will also seek to decentralize my own delegation (potentially through a sub-DAO) if my delegators disagree with my actions. Otherwise I will make a good faith attempt to abstain from decisions that might be considered conflicts of interests, or in the event a decision requires my participation, but might be considered a conflict of interest, I will be guided by the majority opinion of the voters who have delegated to me. This should be possible, with some further research, by implementing it at the smart contract level through a sub-DAO in a trust-minimized manner.
3 Likes
Name: Tri Le (Individual)
Address: 0x565B3bB666772a8ccB0285652e93d6C79597620e
Tally: [Tally | sneakerchef.eth | Tally | sneakerchef.eth
Areas of interest:
- Improving Governance participation
- Supporting Infrastructure
- Tooling, Improving protocol decentralization
Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
As a prospective delegate for the DAO Arbitrum blockchain, my overall goal is to promote the growth and development of the community while ensuring that the interests of all members are represented. To achieve this, I believe that the DAO should prioritize initiatives that foster liquidity and encourage participation from a diverse range of stakeholders.
While liquidity mining can be a powerful tool for incentivizing participation and building momentum, I believe that it should be approached cautiously and with a long-term perspective. In my view, the primary goal of the DAO should be to create a sustainable and resilient ecosystem that can weather market fluctuations and adapt to changing conditions.
Regarding the issues that have been raised in other communities, I believe that it’s important to take a proactive and collaborative approach to addressing concerns and building trust. By engaging with members of other communities in a respectful and constructive manner, we can cultivate a culture of cooperation and mutual benefit that benefits everyone involved.
Ultimately, my stance on these issues is guided by a commitment to transparency, inclusivity, and responsible stewardship of the resources and assets entrusted to the DAO. As a delegate, I would work tirelessly to ensure that the community’s interests are represented and that the DAO continues to thrive and grow over the long term.
Sample Voting Issue 1:
As a delegate, I would vote against the Uniswap proposal as it currently stands. While I believe that bounties can be an effective way to attract new users to Uniswap, the proposal gives Flipside crypto too much control over the allocation of UNI and oversight of the program. In my view, this could lead to centralization of power and create an unfair advantage for Flipside.
Sample Voting Issue 2:
As a delegate, I believe that the Rari hack reimbursement situation is a complex issue that requires careful consideration and a nuanced approach. While I sympathize with those who were affected by the hack, I believe that it’s important to weigh the potential benefits and drawbacks of reimbursement carefully.
In my view, the decision of whether or not to reimburse parties affected by an exploit should be based on a number of factors, including the severity of the exploit, the impact on the community, and the feasibility of reimbursement. In some cases, full reimbursement may be appropriate if the exploit was particularly damaging or if it was the result of a systemic issue within the platform. However, in other cases, it may not be feasible or appropriate to provide full reimbursement.
Ultimately, I believe that the decision of whether or not to reimburse parties affected by an exploit should be made on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the unique circumstances of each situation. As a delegate, I would work to ensure that the interests of all members of the community are represented fairly and that decisions are made in a transparent and responsible manner.
Languages I speak and write:
Russian (native), English (upper intermediate)
LFG ARBITRUM! 
3 Likes