JoJo Delegate Communication Thread

[JoJo]

November 2025 voting

---

---

Snapshot votings

AGV Council Compensation Calibration: Startup-Phase Bonus for Current Council Members

Vote: For

Since both this vote and the previous calibration on previous votes were bundled before cancellation, I will paste here my old rationale

@JoJo

I voted in favour of both options.

First, why both: it doesn’t make sense to push for the change in comp in just one of the cohort.

I do understand that there might be general concerns about what is a de facto retro on current council; matter of the fact, the biggest lift of council is usually exactly when a DAO program needs to stand up, because there is so much more things to do. For this reason, if the new cohort will deserve the raise, the same applies to the current one.

On the next cohort and general idea: the data proposed show how the council might just be underpaid for the responsability and workload they have. There are a few emphirical things I guess we can put on table: a somehow similar job compared to the OAT, a strong presence of council members in the operations of AGV etc. On the last point, as a couple of example that I experienced first hand: David was one of the member with whom I made a job interview a few weeks ago with AGV, and Coinflip has been reporting the progress of AGV live at several events such as EthCC in Cannes to the rest of delegates at the delegates’ day.

At the same time, while I think the raise is fair, there is something to improve. Some members of the council should be more present in the DAO life since we barely know them.
I am not specifically advocating in this case for the IC member, it makes sense that have the work of this person a bit more segmented from here since is not only vital but also closer to more traditional rails; but for the others, we do need a stronger presence.
I won’t specifically refer to any in particular here, but this to me is where effectively there is the biggest different between the current OAT of OpCo and the council of AGV.
Hopefully this is something that will be naturally fixed during next election.

AIP: Raise the gas target, min L2 base fee, & implement improvements to the pricing algorithm

Vote: For

This technical proposal brings several changes that should improve the overall UX of users. I do look forward to not have to pay +5$ in transaction fees in arbitrum in time of turmoil and these updates seem to address these and other situations. I also think the increase of base fee is probably good enough but I do expect to have this analysed in six months from now to understand the implication post implementation.

Tim Chang reconfirmation for AGV council

Vote: For
(see rationale below)

John Kennedy reconfirmation for AGV council

Vote: For

@JoJo

I have voted in favour of both candidates.

Having been closer than most delegates to the AGV team, I have had some insight through the last year about the work done so far. In particular Tim has had a strategic role, being the one with the most experience in VC and been the member of the council advising on investment per tally proposal.
That said, as Jonezee mentioned, if the current council deem Tim and John worth to be in the new council for continuity, we have little to no reason to believe otherwise. The work of the council has not been just oversight, but hands-on based on needs and capabilities.

---

Tally votings

n/a