Delegate address: 0x28341f64084e4dc4e5ca51b749d32340f294f46e
Forum Usernames: @GensDAO
Oct. 24
Arbitrum Token Swap Pilot Program
Proposal: (Snapshot)
Decision: After some consideration, GENS Collective decided to vote AGAINST this proposal.
Premise: The 3-month lock-up on swapped tokens seems insufficient to secure long-term stability. Also, the incoming tokens may lack the robustness of ARB, meaning potential risks to the DAO treasury. Given the brief monitoring phase, we remain unconvinced of this proposal’s capacity to deliver sustainable value.
Nov.24
Adopt a Delegate Code of Conduct & Formalize Operations
Proposal: Snapshot
Decision: After consideration, GENS Collective decided to vote IN FAVOR of this proposal.
Premise: We believe that adopting a Delegate Code of Conduct is essential for enhancing professionalism and integrity within ArbitrumDAO, which is what we aspire to achieve as a community.
Establishing a DAO Events Budget for 2025
Proposal: Tally | Arbitrum | Establishing a DAO Events Budget for 2025
Decision: After some consideration, GENS Collective decided to vote IN FAVOR of this proposal.
Premise: At GENS Collective, we support the proposal not only because we know how useful events are on both an advertising and community level, but mainly because of the transparency and responsibility shown in the proposal. The promise of post-event expense reports is what ultimately convinced us to vote in favor.
Arbitrum Research & Development Collective
Proposal: Tally | Arbitrum | (V2) Arbitrum Research & Development Collective
Decision: After some consideration, GENS Collective decided to vote IN FAVOR this proposal.
Premise: We support this proposal due to the success of the first phase, which positively impacted the ecosystem. The team has demonstrated merit and deserves renewal.
Treasury Management v1.2
Proposal: [Snapshot ]
Decision: After some consideration, GENS Collective decided to vote AGAINST this proposal.
Premise: Considering the number of players in the Arbitrum ecosystem engaged in Treasury Management, we believe that the expert committee should be broader and have a greater plurality of voices on it. The proposal combines the creation of new initiatives with specific appointments and, as it stands, presents a number of unresolved operational risks. In the absence of further details, is why we vote against it.
Restitution For Extensively Delayed ArbitrumDAO Minigrant Winners
Proposal: Snapshot
Decision: After some consideration, GENS Collective decided to vote AGAINST this proposal.
Premise: We are unable to accept this proposal because it identifies fundamental issues with the programme. A significant number of suspicious applications were identified, many of which appeared to have been created for the sole purpose of accessing funds without providing tangible value. Furthermore, the judge selection process was insufficiently rigorous, enabling individuals without the requisite qualifications to become judges, which created opportunities for Sybil attacks. While some projects may be legitimate, it is not feasible to verify their legitimacy after such a lengthy period. Rather than allocating funds indiscriminately, we believe it is wiser to protect the integrity of the DAO.
Hackathon Continuation Program
Proposal: Snapshot
Decision: After some consideration, GENS Collective decided to vote IN FAVOUR (yes onchain) this proposal.
Premise: This programme helps Arbitrum create long-term value from short-term successes like hackathons. Hackathons are good for attracting talent and ideas, but often lack support for turning concepts into projects. This is addressed by providing follow-up and support.
It also shows the value of supporting projects at the start. If done well, this will strengthen the Arbitrum ecosystem and help projects in the network succeed.