Ignas Delegate Communication Thread

1. Basic Info

  • Name: Ignas
  • Delegate Address: ignasdefi.eth | 0x3DDC7d25c7a1dc381443e491Bbf1Caa8928A05B0
  • X (Twitter): x.com
  • Telegram: @ignasdefi
  • Website: https://pinkbrains.io/

2. Intro

I’m Ignas, a solo researcher with the main focus on DeFi. My mission is to provide clear, in-depth insights helping my audiences stay up-to-date with the latest trends while actively supporting DAO development.

I believe in the decentralized future and it means actively participating in Arbitrum DAO in every way I can—whether it’s by serving as a delegate, joining working groups, discussing any proposals or seizing new opportunities that come up. I’ll also be sharing key DAO decisions on X and my blog.

3. Delegate Communication Intent

I’m committed to keeping the Arbitrum community informed with regular, transparent updates. I’ll provide clear insights into my voting choices and reasoning to ensure everyone understands the direction we’re headed and why.

4. Why I Want to be a Delegate
Currently, DeFi DAOs face several internal issues, such as voter apathy leading to governance attacks, insider voting, and voting concentration among a few active voting addresses. Additionally, they face external challenges like regulatory uncertainty.

I believe in a decentralized future, even if it seems naive. However, the current state of crypto is plagued by misaligned incentives that prioritize short-term speculative gains over the core DeFi values of self-sovereignty and custody.

Equally concerning is the trend of McKinsification in DAOs, where decisions are increasingly made by one or two professional consultant delegates. This discourages individual participation, as their opinions and votes have less impact.

To make DeFi DAOs viable, we must align incentives to encourage active participation in governance from the broader crypto community. I believe that community must be at the core of every DAO. Without giving the community a say in protocol governance, we’re no better than the Web2 companies we aim to replace—companies that view their “community” merely as users to extract value from.

I will support initiatives that align token holders with the protocol, such as revenue sharing or other methods to bring value to the token. Token holders are frustrated with exploitative tokenomics that only benefit early insiders who acquired tokens at much lower prices, leaving no upside for new investors. Without incentives to buy and hold tokens, the attractiveness and health of DAOs decline.
As mentioned, I will highlight key votes and decisions of the DAO on X and my blog, as I believe the general public is often unaware of important actions being taken.

5. Disclosure

I am the co-founder of Pink Brains, an organization dedicated to promoting various crypto projects through educational content. You can find more info about us here: pinkbrains | Twitter | Linktree.

I’m a delegate for Lido and Instadapp and will be soon a delegate in here - Arbitrum. Moreover, I’m actively involved in Uniswap, Optimism, Aave,…I plan to apply as a delegate to other DAOs soon, with the same mission of strengthening them and aligning token holders with the protocol.

I always make appropriate disclosures and recuse myself from voting when necessary.

6. Delegation

If anyone would like to delegate to me, please use the following address: 0x3DDC7d25c7a1dc381443e491Bbf1Caa8928A05B0

`1. Proposal: Delegate to Voter Enfranchisement Pool — Event Horizon (Tally)
- Date Voted: September 11, 2024
- Vote: For

Date Voted: September 19, 2024

2. Proposal: [Aave DAO] LTIPP Grant Extension Request (Snapshot)
- Vote: For
- Rationale: I support this proposal as it involves no additional cost and simply extends the timeline to complete the distribution of ARB as originally planned. It ensures the grant is fully utilized without any extra expense.

3. Proposal: Constitutional AIP: Proposal to adopt Timeboost, a new transaction ordering policy (Snapshot)
- Vote: Collect bids in ARB and burn
- Rationale: I vote in favor of implementing Timeboost to enhance DAO revenue because I believe that every user would appreciate having an express lane for their transactions. Specifically, I support the option to collect bids in ARB and burn the proceeds. Burning ARB reduces its supply, which could raise the value of the remaining tokens

4. Proposal: ArbitrumDAO Off-site (Snapshot)
- Vote: Online
- Rationale:
Excited to learn about the directions of our DAO and engaging with delegates and top projects. As a newcomer to Arbitrum’s DAO, I am curious in learning from these discussions and learning more about our collective development potential.

However, I would like to suggest considering an online format for the event rather than hosting it alongside Devcon Thailand or as private event. Given that Devcon-related side events might overlap with ours, an online event could offer greater flexibility and accessibility. Moreover, hosting the event online would significantly reduce costs and enable participation from a global audience, allow more members to engage.

I have a question regarding participation criteria. For newcomers like myself, the current requirements at least 20M ARB from endorsements or to be among the top 100 ARB holders may be challenging and time-consuming. Is there a possibility to lower these criteria or provide alternative pathways for participation? I believe that by making the event more inclusive, we can foster a broader range of contributions and perspectives, which would be valuable for our discussions and overall Arbitrum development.

Thank you for considering my suggestions, and I look forward to the opportunity to contribute and learn from the event.

Date Voted: September 20, 2024

5. Proposal: Terms of Tenure for STEP program manager (Snapshot)
- Vote: Additional funds for one year
- Rationale:
I vote for “Additional funds for one year” because I believe the DAO should cover this cost. The proposer didn’t account for the ARB price changes, especially when paying Steakhouse, who quoted in stablecoin and the DAO accepted.

While it’s unfortunate that the ARB price dropped, it’s not Steakhouse’s fault, and they shouldn’t have to absorb this loss. I also agree with @duokongcrypto that using ARB instead of stablecoin might help avoid such issues in the future, as long as we handle price changes carefully.

Btw, I’m so interested in discussing how we manage these kinds of issues as the DAO grows. Balancing our budget and dealing with external services effectively will be important as we move forward :slight_smile:

6. Proposal: GovHack Devcon in Bangkok - Hack Humanity (Snapshot)
- Vote: 1.5

1 Like

7. Proposal: UPDATED - Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship (Tally)
8. Proposal: [NON-CONSTITUTIONAL] Arbitrum DAO Procurement Committee: Phase II Proposal (Tally)
9. Proposal: Constitutional AIP - Extend Delay on L2Time LockVote onchain (Tally)

Date Voted: September 30, 2024
Vote: For

Date Voted: October 1, 2024

10. Proposal: Research on context and retention (Snapshot)
- Vote: For
- Rationale: I have no issues with this proposal, and it should move forward. No budget is required, and there’s no security risk since it uses an open-source API. Importantly, if approved, this proposal will help identify potential members of the community.

11. Proposal: An EIP-4824 powered daoURI for Arbitrum DAO (Snapshot)
- Vote: For – Use ENS txt records

Date Voted: October 7, 2024

12. Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Funds to Bolster Foundation’s Strategic Partnerships Budget (Tally)
- Vote: For
- Rationale: I already discussed about this proposal in the forum but want to emphasize again, this is an interesting proposal, and it’s good to expand Arbitrum’s collaboration with other projects. It’s especially important to focus on RWAs, which have become quite significant lately.
I’m not sure how much budget should be added, but I would like to know more about your plans for expenditure, expected results, and the budget for each project. Maybe a bit off topic but maybe can consider partnerships with DeFi creators to strengthen the DAO’s mindshare.

13. Proposal: ArbitrumDAO strategic “Off-site” (online) updated proposal (Tally)
- Vote: For
- Rationale: I shared my thoughts in the Snapshot vote and I’m glad the online format was approved. I think hosting the event in October makes more sense than in November or December, as it gives the DAO more time to identify key directions for development. I also like the idea of following up after the event to make sure everything moves forward smoothly.

14. Proposal: Enhancing Multichain Governance: Upgrading RARI Governance Token on Arbitrum (Tally)
- Vote: Abstain

Date Voted: October 11, 2024

15. Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum DAO Delegate Incentive Program (Tally)
- Vote: Yes
- Rationale:
I’m all for these changes:

  • Raising the threshold to 75%: I have no idea to raising the threshold to 75% over the last 90 days cause I will follow what helps the DAO develop. This change will increase delegate participation and is not too hard to achieve.

  • Increasing Delegates’ Feedback (DF) to 30%: I think It will hold delegates responsible for their participation :), pushing them to check the forum regularly to give qualitative feedback on time. If they don’t, they’ll miss out on important discussions.

  • Total Participation (TP) to 65%: Agree that many delegates can easily hit the 60% mark with their tally voting, so this is a reasonable step.

16. Proposal: Fund the Stylus Sprint (Tally)
- Vote: Yes

17. Proposal: LTIPP Retroactive Community Funding Selections (Snapshot)
- Vote: Abstain

18. Proposal: Establishing a DAO Events Budget for 2025 (Snapshot)
- Vote: Yes

Date Voted: October 22, 2024

19. Proposal: (V2) Arbitrum Research & Development Collective (Snapshot)
- Vote: Funded with 2.09M USDC + Council
- Rationale: I voted for the middle option, 2.09M USDC. I believe we need ongoing these ARDC programs to keep governance, security, and research stronger. I think this option will give us enough resources to make good progress without too overspending. Btw, I understand the basic differences between the three options, but if the author could share more details about each initiative and what results we can expect from them, it will easier to evaluate.

20. Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum Token Swap Pilot Program (Snapshot)
- Vote: Abstain
- Rationale: I understand that it’s important to keep good relationships with key projects in the ecosystem, but I’m not sure this is the right move. I think we should consider the risk of price volatility, as it could negatively impact both the project and Arbitrum’s reputation. So I choose to abstain :slightly_smiling_face:

21. Proposal: GCP Council Re-Confirmation Vote for Tim Chang (Snapshot)
- Vote: Please vote “ Reconfirm Tim Chang to GCPC
22. Proposal: GCP Council Re-Confirmation Vote for John Kennedy (Snapshot)
- Vote: Reconfirm John Kennedy to GCPC

Rationale: Thanks for highlighting Tim and John expertise and experiences, I have no problem with them staying in this role. Voted for Reconfirm Tim Chang and John Kennedy to GCPC.

Date Voted: November 1, 2024

23. Proposal: (V2) Arbitrum Research & Development Collective (Tally)

- Vote: For
- Rationale: Glad to see this proposal on on-chain vote! I shared my thoughts in the snapshot because I really believe ongoing ARDC programs are crucial for strengthening our governance, security, and research. I also believe this will help Arbitrum have a professional financial management system.

23. Proposal: Establishing a DAO Events Budget for 2025 (Tally)

  • Vote: For
    - Rationale: I voted for this proposal. The budget is reasonable since it has mostly support on the Snapshot vote. With a clear view of the event budget for 2025, it will help the DAO organize events more effectively and respond quickly to new opportunities, attracting more participants :slightly_smiling_face:

25. Proposal: Adopt a Delegate Code of Conduct & Formalize Operations (Snapshot)

- Vote: For
- Rationale: This seems like a smart move, especially with the Arbitrum DAO growing to over 800 delegates (data from Kamar). I know it’s tough for the mod to keep track of everyone’s actions and make sure they meet the standards for professionalism, transparency ,… So having a clear set of values and behaviors will help hold each delegate responsible for what they do.

I have a question, though. Will there be a clear penalty for delegates who break the Code of Conduct in the Delegate Incentive Program? For example, will a delegate be removed right away for any mistake, or will it depend on how serious it is? I’m asking because I plan to run in December :slight_smile:

By the way, really happy to see this proposal moving forward!