This is the start of my delegate voting thread. In the meantime, some info about me from Redelegation Week:
Background:
Tradfi, where I worked with large institutions (asset owners and managers) on investment governance, investment policy and building technical narratives
Crypto, where I’ve been involved in governance since 2017, first as a researcher (PhD 2021) and later as a Governance Lead for a Defi DAO and protocol specialist for Alchemy.
My vision and approach to being a delegate:
Long-term thinking. Arbitrum DAO can only effectively steward the protocol and ecosystem if it is durable, which leads me to focus on governance issues like value accrual, durability of spending and investment, and iterating in the short term to get to long-term success. This may sometimes require making an unpopular vote.
Win-win solutions. Functional governance requires minimizing the scope for zero-sum games and instead working toward the benefit of the entire DAO, while also ensuring that contributions are rewarded.
Not reinventing the wheel. DAOs are new but the work they do is not - we can learn a lot from how other institutions have solved problems like investment, corporate and political governance.
Proposal: GovHack at EthCC Brussels Vote: yes Rationale: The event at Denver was a major step forward for the DAO, and the time is right for another session to build on that success.
Proposal: Grant request - Curve Finance Vote: yes Rationale: The proposal was aligned via an existing commitment, and complemented other efforts at user acquisition in DeFi.
Proposal: Front-end interface Vote: yes Rationale: Offchain Labs is obviously integral to Arbitrum but it’s also important to encourage other protocol contributions.
Snapshot
Proposal: Kwenta x Perennial: Arbitrum Onboarding Incentives Vote: yes Rationale:
Proposal: Streamline LTIPP bounties Vote: yes Rationale: I voted for this proposal in recognition of the expertise of the LTIPP Council, and the need use it judiciously given the cadence of other proposals needing delegates’ attention.
AIP: BoLD - permissionless validation for Arbitrum Vote: for on Snapshot
Rationale:
AIP: Funds to bootstrap the first BoLD validator - Operational cost sentiment Vote: for Rationale: as above
AIP: Funds to bootstrap the first BoLD validator - Bond sentiment Vote: for Rationale: as above
Pilot Phase: Arbitrum Ventures Initiative Vote: for (no IRL event) on Snapshot, and on Tally Rationale:
Election of STEP Program Manager Vote: 50% Steakhouse, 50% Avantgarde on Snapshot Rationale: Avantgarde’s expertise in asset management, coupled with Steakhouse’s demonstrated experience with reporting and novel asset types, makes them the optimal combination.
Rationale: Each of these delegates in their own way is effectively a core contributor to the DAO, and is already investing the effort to stay involved across multiple projects. That’s what we need for MSS.
ArbitrumHub Evolution: The Next Step in Streamlining Information Access and Raising Awareness for Arbitrum DAO Vote: against on Snapshot Rationale:
ArbitrumDAO Contribution; Safeguarding Software Developers’ Rights Vote: for on Tally Rationale: This is important work that the DAO, given its size, should contribute to.