Voted FOR release of frozen ETH.
Links to relevant comments / clarifications below, explain my position: against distributing funds with any waterfall that benefits Arbitrum (i.e., support funds being returned to victims with equal weight, as AAVE planned), and against using security council powers again to expedite fund release.
Thanks @AaveLabs for the proposal and the update, and more generally for taking initiative in this situation. I am in support of the proposal to release the frozen funds to Defi United’s effort without any waterfall distribution conditions.
Much is unusual and unprecedented about this situation, including the wide range of the affected parties and the fact that Security Council took action in an exploit unrelated to any vulnerability in the Arbitrum Protocol itself. It isn’t self-evident to me…
Shortening the forum discussion and/or temperature check phases (phases 2 and 3) still leaves a minimum of 35 days; the on-chain proposal itself has no technical way of bypassing that.
Thus, AFAICT, there are essentially three possible ways to speed up the process further:
Go forward with the on-chain proposal and in parallel find a large ETH holder to temporarily loan Defi United the ETH (to be paid back with the frozen ETH when it unlocks).
Another Security Council Emergency action.
…