Gauntlet Delegate Communication Thread

Governance Delegate Statements
, ,
1

This will be the main communication thread for Gauntlet’s Arbitrum DAO governance votes both on Snapshot and Tally.

Snapshot Votes
Arbitrum Stable Treasury Endowment Program
Vote: FOR
We believe it is important for the Arbitrum DAO to diversify its treasury. Arbitrum’s $6B treasury is one of it’s most competitive assets. If managed properly the treasury can sustainably fund ongoing DAO operations, offer builders the resources they need to attract users, and serve as a means of bootstrapping DeFi liquidity.

This is a well thought out proposal which will help aid in both diversifying the treasury and attracting DeFi projects via liquidity. We are excited to support this proposal and future treasury diversification proposals.

ArbOS Version 20 “Atlas”
Vote: FOR
EIP-4844 has been a big piece of the excitement around ETH L2’s. It offers the possibility for gas costs on Arbitrum to get reduced even more and may allow for increased sequencer fees. We are excited for what this will help enable when implemented.

Batch Poster Manager and Sequencer Inbox Finality Fix
Vote: FOR
OpSec is an important part of crypto and hacks are too common. Any kind of irreversible hack to the Arbitrum protocol could be catastrophic for it’s long-term adoption. We appreciate this proposal’s efforts to reduce the security risk of Arbitrum by creating a “batch poster manager”.

Empowering Early Contributors
Vote: ABSTAIN
While we do believe it is important to empower and reward early contributors, it can be a tricky balance deciding who does and does not deserve rewards. We do not believe we are prepared to evaluate the contributions of these individuals, so we opted to abstain. If the community values their inputs and opts to rewards these individuals, we support that decision.

Tally Votes
Long Term Incentives Pilot Program
Vote: FOR
Incentives are a core piece of an ecosystem’s ability to grow. It is important for the Arbitrum DAO to deploy their treasury to help ecosystem projects in a responsible fashion. The LTIP is a step in the right direction for getting ongoing project incentives in place, that will rewards developers for coming to Arbitrum.

We encourage the DAO to maintain an analytical approach to their incentive programs, as we learn from these experiments and create positive ROI systems. We hope the committee in charge of LTIP takes time to learn from the STIP program and hones in on long-term value generative incentives for Arbitrum.

3 Likes
2

Snapshot Votes
Funding for Into the Dungeons
Vote: AGAINST
This is a major funding proposal and would be the first time the Arbitrum DAO gave a grant directly to a project. The proposal additionally is asking for the funds to be used for development rather than user incentives or other activity that will directly benefit the DAO. While we understand the importance of helping fund builders, we believe this proposal is a bit premature and would set a bad precedent for project funding.

We would encourage the DAO to continue developing a program to provide funding for gaming projects. It is becoming fairly clear that many of the funding streams are built primarily for the DeFi project lifecycle and gaming projects are struggling to get funding from the DAO. If Arbitrum wants to be competitive in gaming it will need to continue to work with gaming builders.

Tally Votes
Changes to the Constitution and the Security Council Election Process
Vote: FOR
We support this adjustment to the Security Council election process which will help make the elections fairer for all participants.

1 Like
3

Snapshot Votes
Funding for Plurality Labs Milestone 1B
Vote: FOR
We have been excited to see Joe’s involvement in the Arbitrum DAO. He has helped set a culture of action and we are seeing the impact of his early work for the DAO. We are happy to support this continuation of his efforts and see what comes next.

ARDC Research Member
Vote: Blockworks/Delphi 100%
Blockworks and Delphi have both been active in the Arbitrum DAO and have strong research teams. We believe that between the choices, they are best positioned to help answer the most pressing questions for the DAO.

ARDC DAO Advocate
Vote: L2Beat/Ant Federation
L2Beat’s impact in the Arbitrum DAO is seen by all. We are happy to have both L2Beat and Ant Federation helping guide the DAO in the role of DAO Advocate.

ARDC Security Member
Vote: 39.4% OpenZeppelin, 30.3% Trail of Bits, 30.3% Zellic/Debaub
While there are many great options for this category (which is a great signal for the Arbitrum DAO), we wanted to limited our vote to 3 options vs. voting for all of the great firms that have applied. We have seen the OpenZeppelin’s work first hand in the Compound DAO and are excited to see their activity in the Arbitrum DAO. We collaborated with Trail of Bits on the Arbitrum Coalition proposal and feel strongly about their quality of their work and understanding of the Arbitrum DAO. Finally, we were also excited to see the collaboration and thoroughness of the Zellic/Debaub proposal and believe more service providers should look to provide similarly thorough, yet concise, service offerings in their proposals.

ARDC Risk Member
Vote: ABSTAIN
Since there was not an option to abstain in this vote, we are opting to not vote as we have a conflict of interest with Chaos.

Fix Fee Oversight
Vote: 1. Set L1 Surplus Fee and L2 min, 2. Set only min L2 base see, 3. Set only L1 surplus fee, 4. Set neither and cancel
We are excited to continue supporting to integration of EIP-4844 into the Arbitrum ecosystem and believe this upgrade will help advance us along that path.

Tally Votes
Arb OS 20 Atlas
Vote: FOR
EIP-4844 will be a major step for Arbitrum to continue leading the market in gas fees, while also enabling the DAO to generate more income. We are in favor of all the technical upgrades being done to enable this integration.

4

Snapshot Votes
Fund Continuation of the Arbitrum DDA Program
Vote: FOR
It is important for builders to have multiple streams to which they can apply for funding. This enables specialization around different funding types as well as increased likelihood of success in winning developers to the Arbitrum ecosystem. We believe Questbook has been an effective funding stream for the Arbitrum DAO and that builders have suffered from not having access to the DDA Program over the last few months. We are happy to support this proposal and see builders get access to funding streams.

Tally Votes
Fund Plurality Labs 1(B)
Vote: FOR
Plurality Labs has been very hands-on with the Arbitrum DAO and incredibly willing to adapt to the needs of a sometimes ambiguous organizational structure. We are pleased with their ability to get multiple fire starters up and running, while also decentralizing control of these initiatives within the community. We believe it is important for the Arbitrum DAO to continue to fund Plurality Labs’s work in fleshing out DAO operations.

5

Snapshot Votes
Front-end interface to force transaction inclusion during sequencer downtime
Vote: Abstain
There has been a lot of conversations about the proper way to implement this and believe the community did not properly reach consensus. While we are generally supportive of optimizations around the sequencer, we want to ensure proper community alignment, so we are abstaining.

Catalyze Arbitrum Gaming
Vote: For
We are very excited to see the development of funding streams for gaming within the DAO. Initial programs for STIP, backfund, and LTIP have not been structured to properly attract gaming projects. Arbitrum will need a diverse ecosystem of builders in the long-run if it wants to survive. We believe this is a well-balanced proposal that offers longer-term value capture for the DAO and will help get builders bought into the Arbitrum ecosystem.

Expand Tally support for Arbitrum
Vote: FOR
Tally has built crucial infrastructure for the crypto governance ecosystem. We are happy to see deeper support for Arbitrum on the Tally platform.

Tally Votes
Arbitrum Stable Treasury Endowment
Vote: ABSTAIN
This proposal had some subtle but not insignificant changes implemented in between the Snapshot and Tally vote. We do not support this approach to governance and believe there should have been more transparent conversations before the proposal was submitted with revisions. Despite this lapse in process, the changes ended up being relatively minor, so we opted to abstain rather than vote against. In DAOs, it is not just the result, but how you get there that matters.

Security Council
Vote: OpenZepellin - 2M, Certora - 2M, Zellic - 2M, Fred - 2.01M
We are happy to support OpenZepellin, Certora, and Zellic for the Security Council as they are three of the leading cybersecurity firms in the Arbitrum ecosystem and larger blockchain ecosystem. We additionally supported Fred, as he is one of the most knowledgable people on the Arbitrum tech stack and deeply aligned with the Arbitrum ecosystem.

6

Snapshot Votes
LTIP Council Recommendations
Vote: FOR all Council Recommendations
We opted to vote in-line with all of the LTIP council recommendations. We believe they put a lot of time and effort into reviewing these proposals. They did a good job of getting projects to update their proposals and selecting impactful projects for incentives.

Tally Votes
Fund Continuation of the Arbitrum DDA Program
Vote: FOR
In line with our snapshot vote, we believe that Questbook has been an effective funding stream for the Arbitrum DAO and are happy to support it’s continuation.

1 Like
7

Snapshot Votes

Delegate to Voter Enfranchisement Pool — Event Horizon
Vote: For
Event Horizon has developed a unique product that allows for users to feel a larger buy-in to the DAO’s operations, without having a large personal delegation. We can see a path where more high quality delegates emerge within the DAO via their participation in Event Horizon’s delegation.

Subsidy Fund for Security Services
Vote: 50% Do Not Fund, 50% 1 cohort of 8 weeks $2.5M fund
While we see the benefit in funding security audits for the ecosystem, we also find that many projects already have audits. We opted to split our vote between Do Not Fund and 1 Cohort of 8 weeks in order to minimize the initial spend of the program, while we evaluate the results.

Safeguarding Software Developers’ Rights & the Right to Privacy
Vote: Abstain
This proposal is not pertinent to the core issues of the DAO. We opted to Abstain rather than vote against in case the community opts to support this issue.

ACryptoS Protocol - Funding Approval for LTIPP [Post Council Feedback]
Vote: Abstain
We were not convinced by the changes to the proposal that ACryptoS would drive significant value to the Arbitrum ecosystem via their grant request.

Connext - LTIPP [Post Council Feedback]
Vote: For
Connext is a long-term builder in the blockchain ecosystem and has driven a significant amount of volume in the Arbitrum ecosystem. The updates to their proposal regarding offering up to 95% fee rebate to users bridging into Arbitrum (but not for those bridging out) will help create real incentives for users to choose Arbitrum. Their updated milestones also helps provide clarity around expectations.

Smilee Finance - LTIPP [Post Council Feedback]
Vote: Abstain
We agree with the reiterated comments of the advisor committee. This protocol is a bit too early and asking for too much grant funding for their size.

GovHack at ETH CC (Brussels)
Vote: For
We attended the GovHack event in ETHDenver and were pleasantly surprised with the quality of engagement it drove within the community. It is clear there has been an up-tick in community engagement and proposal creation. We would be excited to participate in a GovHack ETH CC.

CVI.Finance - LTIPP [Post Council Feedback]
Vote: Abstain
While we appreciate CVI reducing their grant request 50%, we still found their new milestones and grant request justification a bit hard to grasp.

Rage Trade - LTIPP [Post Council Feedback]
Vote: For
Rage Trade has demonstrated good market traction and offers a unique venue to onboard users to Arbitrum. With the 60%~ reduction in their grant request, we are happy to support this proposal.

D2 Finance - LTIPP [Post Council Feedback]
Vote: Abstain
D2 states their core objective is to drive TVL growth, but structured their milestones around volume traded. While their protocol appears novel, it is early and the difference in milestone structuring kept us from supporting the amended proposal.

Bedrock - LTIPP [Post Council Feedback]
Vote: For
Bedrock has been growing in the restaking scene and offers Arbitrum an opportunity to grow within that space. Their updated proposal includes a 50%~ reduction in grant ask and better details into distribution, which gave us the confidence to support.

Yearn Finance LTIPP [Post Council Feedback]
Vote: For
Yearn has been a staple of the defi ecosystem for many years now. Their proposal amends make it much favorable for the DAO: focusing on net-new flows, a more robust execution plan, and explicit milestones.

Deri Protocol - LTIPP [Post Council Feedback]
Vote: Abstain
Allocating 70% of the grant to trading rebates is an imprudent use of grant funds. Additionally, Deri is relatively early-stage and lacked a strong justification for their grant size.

Tradao - LTIPP [Post Council Feedback]
Vote: Abstain
We agreed with the committee’s concerns around the PMF of the project and it’s associated large grant size.

DODO LTIPP [Post Council Feedback]
Vote: For
Dodo has been a long-term builder in the space, reduced their grant request 50%, included clearer milestones for the grants, and demonstrated long term alignment with Arbitrum via an L3 chain.

Clipper - LTIPP [Post Council Feedback]
Vote: For
Clipper reduced their grant request significantly and added in specific milestones around user acquisition and growth. We are comfortable with these adjustments.

Synthetix - LTIPP [Post Council Feedback]
Vote: For
Synthetix has been one of the oldest perps platforms in defi and is currently one of the largest defi platforms in the Optimism ecosystem. Given the large reduction in their grant request and the change in guidance from the committee, we are comfortable supporting this proposal.

Grant Request - Curve Finance
Vote: For
While this proposal is off-cycle for the LTIP program, Curve is demonstrating strong alignment with the Arbitrum DAO by matching the grant request. Given the excess funds in LTIP, we are compelled to support this grant.

Sushi - LTIPP [Post Council Feedback]
Vote: For
Sushi has reduced their ask almost 50% and given better clarity about the planned use of funds. We are happy to support this proposal as it will help grow Arbitrum liquidity.

Buffer - LTIPP [Post Council Feedback]
Vote: Abstain
We remain in agreement with the committee’s recommendations.

Proposal for Approval of DeDaub as the ADPC Security Advisor
Vote: For
DeDaub has demonstrated good alignment with the Arbitrum ecosystem and the required skillsets for this role.

Pilot Phase: M&A for Arbitrum DAO
Vote: For
The Arbitrum DAO currently has a very large treasury. This can be a strategic advantage but needs to be managed properly. We are supportive of this initial pilot phase to help answer some of the questions the DAO still has around the execution of an M&A initiative; which can be notoriously difficult to execute via DAO governance and hard to quantify the impact of after the fact.

Tally Votes

Double-Down on STIP Successes (STIP-Bridge)
Vote: For
While the Arbitrum incentive process is getting convoluted, no project should suffer due to these complications. We are happy to support the continuation of the STIP program.

GovHack at ETH CC (Brussels)
Vote: For
We attended the GovHack event in ETHDenver and were pleasantly surprised with the quality of engagement it drove within the community. It is clear there has been an up-tick in community engagement and proposal creation. We would be excited to participate in a GovHack ETH CC.

8

Snapshot Votes

MUX STIP Bridge Challenge
Vote: Abstain
Mux has received a significant amount of incentive funding from previous programs and we feel the performance of their metrics post-incentives does not currently justify such a large grant ask. We have spoken with the Mux team and understand they have made updates to both their product and incentive strategy to hopefully improve the performance of their incentives. However, we understand Mux has been a core builder in the Arbitrum ecosystem for a while and are opting to abstain so we do not influence the community’s decision.

Stargate STIP Bridge Challenge
Vote: Approve
Stargate has demonstrated strong growth in onchain metrics and has appropriately sized their grant request.

Solv STIP Bridge Challenge
Vote: Approve
Solv has seen decent growth in their core metrics and is asking for a relatively small grant.

Sanko GameCorp STIP Bridge Challenge
Vote: Abstain
We do not feel comfortable evaluating the performance of Sanko GameCorp’s previous incentive programs and are opting to abstain.

Tide STIP Bridge Challenge
Vote: Abstain
There is ambiguity around the potential ROI of Tide’s current proposal, which is leading us to abstain. We would recommend them to include clearer forecasts and better explain how their previous programs will be carried out moving forward.

KyberSwap STIP Bridge Challenge
Vote: Abstain
We would encourage the team to provide a clearer set of KPIs for their future incentive proposals.

Gains Network STIP Addendum
Vote: Abstain
Gains has received a large amount of incentives from Arbitrum in the past, but has seen a drop off in TVL post incentives. We are not comfortable with the size of the proposal they are asking for given this performance. However, we understand Gains has been a core builder of the Arbitrum ecosystem for a while and are opting to abstain so the community can decide.

Boost (Prev. RabbitHole) STIP Addendum
Vote: Abstain
We are not certain whether Boost is improving the Arbitrum incentive program efficiency or allocating primarily to mercenary farmers.

Thales Protocol STIP Addendum
Vote: Approve
Thales has seen strong performance in their metrics and is asking for a relatively small grant size.

Savvy DAO STIP Addendum
Vote: Approve
Savvy has maintained their TVL relatively well post incentives, which makes us optimistic for their continuation. We would encourage the team to be highly cognizant of the concerns raised by the DAO during this process.

Stake DAO STIP Addendum
Vote: Abstain
We have concerns about the efficiency and sustainability of Stake DAO’s incentive programs.

Furucombo STIP Addendum
Vote: Abstain
Furucombo has been around the ecosystem a long time and benefited from past incentive programs, yet we do not see strong enough growth to justify continued incentive allocation.

Socket Bridge STIP Addendum
Vote: Abstain
Socket’s proposal was very minimal and did not give us the confidence needed to support.

Angle DAO STIP Addendum
Vote: Approve
Angle DAO has been a strong builder across the blockchain ecosystems. We are excited to see their continued investment in the Arbitrum ecosystem.

OpenOcean STIP Addendum
Vote: Abstain
We have concerns about the effectiveness of OpenOcean’s incentive program structure.

Thetanuts Finance STIP Addendum
Vote: Approve
Thetanuts has seen strong performance in their metrics.

Dolomite STIP Addendum
Vote: Approve
Dolomite has seen strong performance in their metrics.

Umami Finance STIP Addendum
Vote: Approve
Umami has seen strong performance in their metrics.

Arbitrum Multi-sig Support Service (MSS)
Vote: 1) For implementing & reporting; 2) For implement; 3) Abstain; 4) Against
This is an incredibly valuable service for the DAO that should both improve operational efficiency and reduce annual spending.

Streamlining the LTIPP Bounties
Vote: For
Gauntlet is very in-favor of proposal that improve the operational efficiency of the DAO. We believe this initiative will allow for the required research to improve the DAO’s incentive processes.

Kwenta x Perennial: Arbitrum Onboarding Incentives
Vote: For
Perennial has been a long-time builder in the Arbitrum ecosystem and is helping onboard Kwenta to Arbitrum. This is a great opportunity for the DAO to allocate incentives towards a user group from a different chain environment.

Tally Votes

Grant Request - Curve Finance
Vote: For
Curve is one of the oldest teams in DeFi and Michael is putting his money where his mouth is by matching the incentive program request. We are excited to see their continued investment in the Arbitrum ecosystem.

9

strong text# Snapshot Votes
Set up a Sub-Committee for the Security Services Subsidy Fund
Vote: Against
The Arbitrum DAO has elected a variety of committees already to handle procurement and security services. We are not sure what the purpose of this additional subcommittee is and why their funding cannot come out of the already approved funding.

AIP: Nova Fee Router Proposal
Vote: For
We are highly supportive of this proposal which will both programmatically allocate sequencer fees to the DAO treasury (minimizing governance operations moving forward) and ensure the treasury is best able to utilize its funds.

AIP: Activate Stylus and Enable Next-Gen WebAssembly Smart Contracts (ArbOS 30)
Vote: For
Stylus is one of the most exciting technical developments coming out of the Arbitrum ecosystem currently. There are many developers who do not currently build on blockchains because of friction around programming language requirements; as well as many who do not build on Arbitrum/Ethereum. This proposal will help make Arbitrum one of the most inclusive blockchain environments to build an application on.

AIP: Support RIP-7212 for Account Abstraction Wallets (ArbOS 30)
Vote: For
Crypto has long struggled with user onboarding due to the pains of wallet creation and key management. This proposal will allow users an easier to onboard to the blockchain and manage their wallet.

Election of STEP Program Manager
Vote: 50% Steakhouse / 50% Avant Garde
We have been able to interact with both Steakhouse and Avant Garde in Arbitrum and other ecosystems and respect their work. Either would be a great program manager for the STEP initiative.

Tally Votes

Front-end interface to force transaction inclusion during sequencer downtime
Vote: For
This proposal will help minimize the disruptions to users during sequencer downtime. Especially given the recent issues with blockchain outages, this is an important risk to address.

Pilot Phase: M&A for Arbitrum DAO
Vote: For
The Areta team has done a good job of engaging the community to get a conversation going about what M&A with a DAO could like. We are supportive of this pilot to answer many of the outstanding questions that will help get the program off the ground.

Catalyze Gaming Ecosystem Growth on Arbitrum
Vote: For
There has been quite a lot of talk about this proposal since being posted. We would firstly like to flag issue with such aggressive commentary being raised so late in the proposal process (which has been long). There has been ample time to engage with the proposal, the authors, and the team. In our experience, they were very willing to get on calls to answer questions and demonstrated competence around what it means to build a gaming ecosystem.

More specifically to the proposal itself, we believe that Arbitrum will need to be more than just “the DeFi chain” and that gaming is a piece of that. While many gaming projects contribute to the growth of Arbitrum wallets, active users, transaction volume, and sequencer revenue, they were not able to benefit from the recent DAO programs (STIP, LTIP, STEP, etc.). This proposal does a good job of securing funding to gaming programs in an ongoing manner (needed for gaming projects with long development cycles) and in a manner that is value accruing to the DAO. We agree with the community about the importance of clawback functionality and a DAO oversight component.

Constitutional AIP - Security Council Improvement Proposal
Vote: For
We are supportive of these improvements to the Security Council process which will improve the security of the chain.

ArbitrumDAO Contribution; Safeguarding Software Developers’ Rights
Vote: Abstain
We are supportive of DEF and Coin Center, but are not sure if this is the more prudent use of the treasury funds. We have opted to abstain so the community can choose to support these causes if these wish.

10

Snapshot Votes

Pilot Phase: Arbitrum Ventures Initiative
Vote: For [No IRL Event]
We are cautiously optimistic at the idea of Arbitrum DAO funding venture capital funds focused on the Arbitrum ecosystem. We believe this proposal is a good step to explore a potential larger initiative. We would encourage the DAO to explore liquid, non-custodial treasury management strategies in the shorter term as this can help the DAO meet future financial obligations.

AIP: BoLD - permissionless validation for Arbitrum
Vote: For
We are supportive of permissionless validation as a means of making Arbitrum more fault-tolerant and decentralized. These core protocol upgrades will continue to help differentiate Arbitrum in a more competitive chain environment.

AIP: Funds to bootstrap the first BoLD validator - Bond sentiment.
Vote: For
We are supportive of this proposal as a step towards implementing the BoLD validator.

AIP: Funds to bootstrap the first BoLD validator - Operational cost sentiment.
Vote: For
It is crucial to get adoption for BoLD with a core set of proposers. We are supportive for this initial proposal to offer incentives to these actors as a means of bootstrapping the system.

Pilot Stage – Treasury Backed Vaults research and development
Vote: Against
We have two major worries for this proposal, which have been communicated with the team. Firstly, this proposed solution opens the DAO treasury up to some major risks (in the event of ARB price declining) and offers a somewhat blank check to the protocol (continuously drawing more ARB to prevent liquidation). Secondly, the proposal looks for funding to complete R&D + necessary audits. There have not been great answers for the community on either of these points.

[Non-Constitutional] Betting on Builders: Infinite Launchpad Proposal
Vote: Against
It is hard to see a clear path to a positive ROI for the DAO with this proposal.

Tally Votes
Kwenta x Perennial: Arbitrum Onboarding Incentives
Vote: For
We are excited at this proposal’s prospect to bring a top defi platform to the Arbitrum ecosystem and attract a new set of users to the chain.

11

Snapshot Proposals

ArbitrumHub Evolution
Vote: Against
We believe the costs for this proposal are a bit inflated and not a good use of the DAO’s funds for what they are receiving. We would be more supportive of this proposal if it adopted a more realistic budget.

Multisig Support Service (MSS) Elections
Vote: PGov, Jojo, Avantgarde, Cattin, Sinkas, Arana Digital, Disruption Joe, StableLab, Frisson, 0xMims, 404 DAO, Alex Lumley
While there were many great applicants for the MSS proposal, we opted for this selection of 12 candidates based on their previous efforts within the Arbitrum DAO/ecosystem, their proactive communication, and demonstrated experience within the broader governance landscape.

1 Like
12

Snapshot Proposals

Pilot for a Questbook Jumpstart fund for problem definition and DAO improvement
Vote: Against
It is unclear what the explicit impact of this proposal will be for the Arbitrum DAO, yet it has a substantial budget associated with it.

Entropy Advisors: Exclusively Working With Arbitrum DAO
Vote: For
Entropy fills a much-needed role by serving as both a neutral operational party and a service provider to Arbitrum DAO. Both Matt and Sam of Entropy have proven significant value to Arbitrum DAO in their previous roles at Blockworks Research, and have already made meaningful contributions to the Arbitrum DAO process. While 2.5M is a significant sum of funds, we believe that if Entropy can meet it’s hiring and operational goals, the impact on Arbitrum DAO operations can be well worth the cost.

Gaming Catalyst Program (GCP) Council Voting
Vote: ImmutableLawyer, CoinflipCanada, David Bolger, Greg Canessa, Karthik Raiju
The aforementioned candidates represent strong candidates across their respective areas of expertise. We opted to vote 20% of our voting power for each candidate, based on their communicated experience in Governance, Operations, Venture/Investment, gaming, and Growth/BD.

Furucombo’s Misuse of Funds
Vote: For
We believe the original offense and the lack of proactive communication regarding Furocombo’s misuse of their STIP Backfund grant is sufficient grounds to ban Furocombo from future Arbitrum grants. While we voted for this proposal, we do believe a more clear and enforceable Code of Conduct for grantees should be established to ensure

13

Change Arbitrum Expansion Program to allow deployments of new Orbit chains on any blockchain
Vote: For
Expansion of Arbitrum beyond Ethereum presents the best opportunity for widespread adoption of the Arbitrum tech stack. Arbitrum remains “Ethereum-aligned” through it’s continued and aggressive capital investments in the dominance of Arbitrum One, Nova, and a continued effort to provide investment in Arbitrum Orbit chains settling to both Ethereum and Arbitrum itself.

Critiques of this proposal have primarily focused on a preference toward open-source licensing of Orbit tooling and concerns of capital prioritization in non-Ethereum ecosystems. We believe these concerns are valid topics for discussion but are largely independent of the immediate impact of the Arbitrum Expansion Program proposal and should be discussed in greater detail.

14

AIP: ArbOS 31 “Bianca” - Activation of Arbitrum Stylus, RIP-7212 Support, & Nova Fee Router Proposal
Vote: For
Gauntlet votes in favor of the ArbOS 31 and the accompanying technical upgrades that improve developer experience. OpenZeppelin’s review of the executable payload of this proposal found no issues.

Arbitrum Multi-sig Support Service (MSS) Nomination Thread
Vote: For
As indicated in the June 30 update, Gauntlet approves funding the canonical multisig proposal.

[RFC] Incentives Detox Proposal]
Vote: For
The Incentives Detox proposal represents an important signal to the community of the DAOs intentions to both analyze previous incentive programs and take measured efforts to integrate learnings into a future incentives program.

15

ARB Staking: Unlock ARB Utility and Align Governance
Vote: For

Transparency and Standardized Metrics for Orbit Chains
Vote: Abstain
Gauntlet maintains it’s opinion per the below post, however does not want to stand in the way of the proposal as it reaches the end of it’s temperature check. To support this proposal onchain we’d prefer to see greater detail paid to relevant Orbit chain data as it pertains to onchain liquidity, growth, and potential incentives programs.

ArbitrumDAO Governance Analytics Dashboard
Vote: For

Entropy Advisors: Exclusively Working With Arbitrum DAO (Onchain)
Vote: For
Entropy fills a much-needed role by serving as both a neutral operational party and a service provider to Arbitrum DAO. Both Matt and Sam of Entropy have proven significant value to Arbitrum DAO in their previous roles at Blockworks Research, and have already made meaningful contributions to the Arbitrum DAO process. While 2.5M is a significant sum of funds, we believe that if Entropy can meet it’s hiring and operational goals, the impact on Arbitrum DAO operations can be well worth the cost.

16

** Should the DAO Default to using Shielded Voting for Snapshot Votes?** (Snapshot)
Vote: Against
Gauntlet voted against this proposal in belief that transparency is paramount in both elections and votes.

Proposal to Temporary Extend Delegate Incentive System (Snapshot)
Vote: For
Gauntlet believes that delegate incentivization has positive benefits in attracting quality delegates, retaining existing delegates, and driving meaningful delegate engagement in the Arbitrum ecosystem. Gauntlet also recognizes that SEED has taken proactive steps in drafting the program’s next iteration and has been receptive to feedback on the delegate incentives design.

ArbitrumDAO Off-site (Snapshot)
Gauntlet has voted abstain as industry conferences have proven effective in aggregating stakeholders and serving as a satisfactory medium for engaging active delegates and stakeholders. We do not feel strongly that an Off-Site would bring benefits or cause harm, and thus, we have abstained.

An (EIP-4824 powered) daoURI for the Arbitrum DAO (Snapshot)
Gauntlet has abstained from this proposal due to questions about the DAO process. However, we generally support the concept.

Strategic Treasury Management on Arbitrum (Snapshot)
Vote: Abstain
Gauntlet has abstained from this proposal due to a conflict of interest.

Should the DAO Create COI & Self Voting Policies? (Snapshot)
Vote: Strict Self-Voting
To date, Gauntlet has abstained from proposals that present a direct conflict of interest regarding its core services, thus supporting this standard for all DAO delegates.

17

[Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship]
Vote: Against, Abstain, Panda, Unicorn
Gauntlet supports investing in Arbitrum security but recognizes ongoing work by ARDC, previous discussions around security bounties from Immunefi, Spearbit, etc., previously signaled toward a more comprehensive approach to security contests and bug bounties. We’re thus hesitant to support one-off proposals on event sponsorships and security.

Funds to bootstrap the first BoLD validator (onchain)
Vote: For
We are supportive of permissionless validation as a means of making Arbitrum more fault-tolerant and decentralized. These core protocol upgrades will continue to help differentiate Arbitrum in a more competitive chain environment.

ARB Staking: Unlock ARB Utility and Align Governance
Vote: For
Gauntlet views this proposal as a progressive step toward increasing future optionality in the development of ARB utility and the potential for revenue sharing within the Arbitrum ecosystem.

[CANCELED] Delegate to Voter Enfranchisement Pool — Event Horizon
This proposal has been canceled. Gauntlet voted against the proposal to ensure it is not executed, given its current state as a canceled proposal.

18

[Constitutional] Extend Delay on L2Time Lock
Vote: For
Gauntlet voted in support of this proposal; although eight days will increase the time to execute proposals, it should also allow the Security Council to review and act in the event of a governance emergency.

STIP-Bridge Operational Budget
Vote: For
Gauntlet supports funding operational costs as outlined in the Operational Budget for STIP Bridge.

[Replace Oversight Committee with MSS] Delegate to Voter Enfranchisement Pool — Event Horizon
Vote: For
Gauntlet believes the MSS is an appropriate replacement for the Oversight Committee and supports returning the 125K ARB allocated to the Committee to the DAO Treasury.

19

ArbitrumDAO Procurement Committee Phase II
Vote: For
Following ADPC Phase 1, Phase 2 focuses on RPC providers and events management, two clear needs in the Arbitrum ecosystem. We look forward to the team’s execution of these deliverables.

[Pyth Network] Arbitrum LTIPP Extension Request
Vote: Against
The DAO voted on an incentives detox, and this would violate that agreement. Pyth can apply for future programs and cite their reasons for future grants in those requests.

Enhancing Multichain Governance: Upgrading RARI Governance Token on Arbitrum
Vote: For
Rari has long been a partner of Arbitrum and was one of the first Orbit L3s to deploy using the Arbitrum stack. OZ has audited the payload at Gauntlet’s request, and we support this proposal.

Synthetix LTIP Grant Extension Request
Vote: Against
Reasoning: While we support the Synthetix protocol’s deployment on Arbitrum, the DAO approved an incentives detox, and this proposal would violate that agreement. Synthetix can apply for future programs and cite their case for more incentives when those programs are live.

Fund the Stylus Sprint
Vote: For
Stylus is a strategic deployment and Gauntlet supports bootstrapping momentum for this new important tooling within the Arbitrum ecosystem. The committee members are of high quality including The Arbitrum Foundation, Offchain Labs, Open Zeppelin, and Entropy.

Delegate to Voter Enfranchisement Pool — Event Horizon (Onchain)
Vote: For
Gauntlet has voted in favor of this proposal. While we are generally skeptical of meta-governance initiatives based on historical results, and a 7M ARB delegation exceeds our preferred trial amount to spend on such an experiment, Event Horizon has worked consistently with delegates for 6 months to get this proposal off the ground. While Gauntlet feels the delegation amount is large for such an experiment, significant safeguards are in place to ensure the delegation can be removed or the program ends if it underperforms.

20

ArbitrumDAO Off-site (Snapshot)
Vote: Drop Idea, Abstaain, Online
Gauntlet feels that existing events have proven sufficient and effective for Arbitrum DAO coordination and activities. Gauntlet also understands the ADPC and multiple existing vendors (Entropy, Arbitrum Foundation, etc.) have explored these kinds of events in the past.

Terms of Tenure for STEP program manager (Snapshot)
Vote: Additional Funds for a Year, 6 months, Abstain.
While we support STEP, this kind of program management mistake is not ideal. It is part of the reason why Gauntlet has pushed for a more effective and expedited treasury management tooling and infrastructure in the future.

Constitutional AIP: Proposal to adopt Timeboost, a new transaction ordering policy (Snapshot)
Vote: Collect Bids in ETH
This proposal is a temperature check and asked the DAO for its preference on bid payment in ETH or ARB if time boost was implemented. Gauntlet believes fee collection in ARB makes the most sense at the current time, as transactions are already settled in ETH on Arbitrum, and the DAO would benefit from treasury diversification if fees were collected in this manner. This vote does not endorse Timeboost adoption at this current time, as many have raised fair points around the potential research holes regarding TImeboost.

[Aave DAO] LTIPP Grant Extension Request (Snapshot)
Vote: Against
Reasoning: The DAO approved an incentives detox, and this proposal would violate that agreement. Aave can apply for future programs and cite their case for more incentives when those programs are live.

[CANCELED] Upgrade Governor Contracts by Transfering Timelock Roles to the New Governors (onchain)
Vote: Against
Gauntlet voted against this proposal as it was canceled.