I voted FOR this change. It is good to leverage existent structures within the DAO.
1 Like
It’s great to see this experiment in expanded participation taking root - happy to see the proposal progressing here, and congratulations on your success in the Compound delegate race!
Voted FOR the change on Snapshot as it seems a clear and commonsense update.
For the Tally vote, I will be voting FOR in the spirit of further decentralization. The experiment has the potential to deliver perspective and other benefits beyond voting (for both Arbitrum and for EventHorizon) - ideally we’d see things like a clearer path for onboarding retail participants come out of this, as well as broader participation and deliberation, whether here or on the EH discord. Those seem like fair expectations given the level of trust involved in making EH a top-15 delegate for the coming year.
1 Like
The results are in for the [Replace Oversight Committee with MSS] Delegate to Voter Enfranchisement Pool — Event Horizon off-chain proposal.
See how the community voted and more Arbitrum stats:
1 Like
Delegate to Voter Enfranchisement Pool — Event Horizon (Tally vote)
After consideration, the @SEEDgov delegation has decided to “FOR” on this proposal at the Tally vote.
Rationale
Although we are maintaining our favorable vote on this occasion and had already provided a rationale for our vote in Snapshot, considering the time gap between one vote and another, we felt it was worthwhile to reaffirm our position on this proposal.
Since the amount to be delegated barely represents 7% of the quorum needed for an on-chain proposal and there are oversight mechanisms in place by the DAO (the MSS), we see the proposal as a controlled experiment.
On the other hand, in the early stages of SEEDLatam (now SEEDGov) we ran a similar experiment with delegations over a year and a half, (which you can view here) making it particularly interesting for us to observe the outcome of this initiative.
1 Like
We voted FOR the proposal for the MSS amendment to the original proposal and the main onchain proposal on Tally.
We believe this is an interesting experiment to encourage small size token holders to get involved in the governance in a meaningful way and a good way of utilizing the treasury to contribute to the voting situations. Delegating the operations to the Arbitrum MSS also makes sense.
1 Like
The Treasure ARC voted in favor of MSS amendment to the Event Horizon proposal. It is a good use of the MSS, cuts down double handling and saves costs.
1 Like
DAOplomats voted FOR this proposal during the onchain vote.
We are supportive of this proposal and would love to see the results of this initiative.
1 Like
I vote against this proposal on Tally. I believe it makes no sense to delegate direct voting power from the DAOs treasury to a pool of voters who will have no incentive and will not be aligned with the DAO’s interests.
The fact that governance tokens hold economic value aligns holders with their governance duties (if I vote poorly, the token loses value). This proposal undermines that alignment.
Moreover, I don’t understand the 325K paid to maintain this system. I believe those funds would be much better utilized if they were used, for example, to fund marketing campaigns like ‘Re-delegation Week,’ explaining to ARB holders why it is important to delegate their vote or by creating incentives to do so.
I appreciate Event Horizon for the proposal and the interest in experimenting. I just believe this is not the best mechanism
@pedrob much of this has been discussed in the forum already, feel free to give it a read.
The pool has many guard rails to ensure alignment, such as the MSS multi-sig. Additionally, the worry about “skin in the game” applies equally to all existing delegates already. Event Horizon is no different, but has the added benefit of onboarding new voters and eventually delegates, further decentralizing Arbitrum while also expanding the idea generation pipeline of the DAO.
In any case, we appreciate your concerns and hope to iterate this pipeline together over the coming year.
Thank you for your response. I did read the arguments and the discussion, which are valuable and interesting. However, none of them convinced me that the DAO should remove ARB from the treasury, send it to a multisig whose custody poses risks, and fund this experiment.
On the other hand, I also disagree that having the MSS control your voting direction (meaning “ensure alignment”) is a good idea. What exactly would you need to do for the MSS to effectively exercise its veto right in practice? In any case, what you´re really doing is limiting your voting power to what the group of delegates within the MSS deems appropriate. And this, at some point, restricts the plurality that this proposal aims to achieve. For what it’s worth, I apologize for not joining that discussion in a timely manner.
I voted For. The proposal seems like a step in the right direction. The goal of our DAO (or any DAO) should be to get as many active people involved in delegation and governance as possible. Many times, we see similar profiles of people being more involved in this type of governance. Maybe this proposal could bring in more diverse-minded people. I believe we would all benefit from it in the long term. I am excited about this program and look forward to the results/report after some months in action.
1 Like
We went through the process and find that users dont need to have any $ARB in wallet to mint the pass. My concern is that the balance between governance rights and economic stake is crucial. ARB holders have a direct financial investment and risk in the Arbitrum ecosystem, which legitimizes their role in governance. Allowing non-ARB holders to vote disrupts this balance, diluting the influence of those who are genuinely invested in the long-term success of the ecosystem. This shift is unfair to ARB holders who have a vested interest in the platform’s future.
1 Like
This has been addressed multiple times now. Reposting the latest response just a few posts above:
We support this proposal and really like what Event Horizon is doing.
Voter empowerment and participation is definitely something we should encourage
One major change we would like to see in Event Horizon in the future though is a requirement from participants to hold some tokens of the DAO they are voting for.
Its great to have a meta governance block vote, but the voters do need to have skin in the game as mentioned by many others here.
2 Likes
The following reflects the views of the Lampros Labs DAO governance team, composed of @Blueweb, @Euphoria, and @Nyx, based on our combined research, analysis and ideation.
We are voting FOR this proposal.
We think this proposal is a good move for the DAO. It aims to get more people actively involved in delegation and governance, which should be a key goal for us. We support the idea of making the DAO more inclusive and decentralized.
This proposal helps solve a big problem in that it gives a voice to people who are very interested in the community but don’t have enough funds to make a difference in voting. By removing this money barrier, we can tap into the ideas and energy of many more community members.
To make this even better, we suggest creating a simple, easy-to-use interface. This would make it easier for users to vote and stay active, removing any technical obstacles that might stop people from participating.
Overall, we believe this proposal can help make our DAO stronger and more representative of our whole community.
1 Like
I voted FOR this proposal, as stated previously I think this is a worthwhile experiment.
I was a bit surprised by the additional costs brought up in Tally, I believe there are ways we could have optimized them - hopefully we’ll be able to assess and adjust after the first trial period.
Thanks
1 Like
We are in full support of the Event Horizon proposal. Empowering smaller ARB holders through collective voting is an innovative step towards increasing participation and fostering inclusivity in the Arbitrum DAO. The Voter Pass system, which enables individuals with lower capital to pool their voting power, aligns with the core values of decentralization and community engagement.
This proposal also addresses the critical issue of low voter turnout by introducing the Implicit Delegation model, which incentivizes governance participation based on commitment rather than capital. We believe this approach will bring more voices into the decision-making process, strengthening the DAO as a whole.
We look forward to seeing how Event Horizon enhances governance within the Arbitrum ecosystem and provides long-term value to the community.
1 Like
@EventHorizonDAO why was this onchain proposal withdrawn on Tally?
and why does it’s title now has the [CANCELLED] prefix?
That’s an old proposal that contained errors. The one that’s currently live can be found here.
1 Like
The results are in for the Delegate to Voter Enfranchisement Pool — Event Horizon on-chain proposal.
See how the community voted and more Arbitrum stats:
1 Like