The following reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst, @Sinkas, and @Manugotsuka, and it’s based on their combined research, fact-checking, and ideation.
We’re voting FOR the proposal.
We believe GMC’s recommendations are sensible and balance yield and risk well. We have followed the conversation in the comments above regarding the lack of Arbitrum-native protocols in the allocations. While we understand where the comments are coming from, we do not see it as a reason to be against the proposal.
The purpose of the Growth Management track, according to the original proposal, was defined as:
Growth Management will focus on strategic partnerships by exclusively reinvesting the DAO’s ETH holdings into “ETH-backed strategies”. ETH-backed strategies are defined as opportunities that earn yield on ETH or ETH-pegged assets, with high guarantees of returning the underlying deployed to the DAO treasury at a certain point in the future.
Although it’d be a pleasant and welcoming development, deploying the ETH on Arbitrum-native protocols was never an explicit requirement. We trust that the GMC considered the possible alternatives and ultimately decided that the selected recommendations are best for what we’re trying to achieve.
Lastly, given this is supposed to be the first round of what’s supposed to be multiple future deployments of ETH from the DAO’s treasury, we think it’d be beneficial to figure out how Arbitrum-native protocols can mitigate the GMC’s concerns and receive an allocation in the future.