Karpatkey Delegate Communication Thread

Governance
1

Delegate Information

Name: karpatkey
Delegate Address: 0x583E3EDc26E1B8620341bce90547197bfE2c1ddD
Forum Representatives: @ruca.eth @santinomics @tom4s @coltron.eth @jameskbh
Tally Profile: karpatkey | Tally
Forum: @karpatkey
Twitter: https://twitter.com/karpatkey
Languages: English, Portguese and Spanish

Introduction and Experience

karpatkey is a DeFi-native organisation specialising in professional DAO finance through industry-leading research and tooling since 2020. We’ve been working with GnosisDAO, Balancer, ENS, CoW Protocol, and Lido on financial planning, operations, and strategy, diversifying their treasuries into sustainable portfolios of DeFi investments designed to support DAOs in executing their missions.

Why karpatkey

The Arbitrum DAO is well-positioned to lead by taking community-driven governance initiatives and turning them into highly impactful programs that strengthen the protocol’s future.

At karpatkey, our governance team taps our network of engineers, DeFi strategists, data/financial/quant analysts, and accountants for subject matter expertise. As DAO treasury developers and contributors to some of our industry’s most reputable DeFi protocols, our team has the knowledge, trust, and alignment to contribute to Arbitrum’s growth moving forward meaningfully.

We pride ourselves on being hands-on delegates in our areas of expertise and upholding our core values in every area of our participation.

In addition to our well-known DeFi and Treasury-related skills, we are interested in making an impact in broader DAO governance discussions, such as delegate incentive programs as discussed in [RFC-2] and taking a more active role in the Arbitrum Incentive Program Working Group. Our governance team is already attending the weekly Arbitrum calls, recently attended DAO Day spaces, and is committed to increasing involvement.

Delegate Communication Intent

This thread will provide regular updates to the community to ensure transparency and fully communicate our rationale as delegates. These updates will include our explanation for voting and may consist of other announcements related to our activity as an Arbitrum delegate.

Disclosure

We are active contributors to the governance of other protocols, such as AAVE, Uniswap, and Safe. We also manage treasuries or serve on treasury committees for protocols such as Balancer, GnosisDAO, and ENS, and we hold multiple crypto assets in our own treasury. More information is freely available on our treasury reports.

Waiver of Liability

By delegating to karpatkey, you acknowledge and agree that karpatkey will participate on a best-efforts basis and will not be liable for any damages related to participation in the Arbitrum Protocol or this DAO.

12 Likes
2

Voting Actions 2024: January 15th – 19th.

Proposal:Pilot program Council Elections
Vote: Abstain
Reasoning: We have abstained from this proposal because we are nominees for a seat on this council.

Proposal: Pilot Program Advisor Elections
Vote: Boardroom, JoJo and SeedLATAM
Reasoning: The advisor role is critical for the LTIPP. While all the available candidates are well-qualified, our final selection reflects our belief that these advisors will provide unbiased and high-quality support for LTIPP applicants. Our selection of Boardroom, JoJo, and SeedLatam represents our trust in these candidates based on their current work with the Arbitrum DAO and also their history of work in other communities.

Proposal: Constitutional AIP - Security Council Improvement Proposal
Vote: Increase the threshold to 9/12
Reasoning: Given the similar signer’s configuration on both safes, this option makes more sense operationally. It is simpler and does not compromise the security.

1 Like
3

Voting Actions 2024: January 29th – February 2nd.

Proposal: Election of Procurement Committee Members (ADPC)
Vote: 33.3% for Joseph [immutablelawyer], 33.3% for Paul Imseih [pablo], Bernard Schmid [bernard]
Reasoning: While we recognize that all candidates had a strong profile and would be a good fit, our approach for this election was to pick candidates with complementary skills and experiences to compose the committee. In our view, @immutablelawyer, @pablo, and @bernard represent the best choices for this strategy.

Proposal: [Constitutional] Changes to the Constitution and the Security Council Election Process
Vote: For
Reasoning: We support these election procedure changes as they ensure a fair process, giving all candidates the same exposure. The other additional procedures (message signing and constitution text changes) also address known issues.

Proposal: [Non-Constitutional]: Arbitrum Stable Treasury Endowment Program
Vote: Abstain
Reasoning: We are members of the proposed screening committee and, therefore, have abstained.

Proposal: AIP: ArbOS Version 20 “Atlas”
Vote: For
Reasoning: This new version keeps Arbitrum up to date with Ethereum, enabling new features that give developers more tools to develop on all Arbitrum chains.

3 Likes
4

Voting Actions 2024: February 5th – February 9th

Proposal: AIP: Batch Poster Manager and Sequencer Inbox Finality Fix
Vote: For
Reasoning: We support these changes as they aim to bolster the security and resilience of the Arbitrum systems without altering the existing trust model.

Proposal: Empowering Early Contributors: The community Arbiter Proposal 2.0
Vote: Abstain
Reasoning: We have abstained because there needs to be more discussion and consensus on contributor payments tied to Discord and WeChat activity. Despite the community activity, we are concerned that these metrics presented are not scalable ways to measure contribution.

Proposal: Long Term Incentives Pilot Program
Vote: Yes
Reasoning: The reasoning for support is the same as the snapshot.

5

Voting Actions 2024: February 12th – February 16th

Proposal: Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Funding for Into the Dungeons: Machinata - a PvP Digital Miniature Game V2
Vote: Against
Reasoning: There is a need for a framework for the gaming vertical on Arbitrum so all projects can have a clear direction of how to present their proposals and what is relevant to their value proposition. Regarding the current ask, we see it as something other than something that the DAO should foster through a direct proposal.

6

Voting Actions 2024 - February 26th – March 1st

Proposal: [Non-constitutional] Proposal to fund Plurality Labs Milestone 1B(ridge)
Vote: For
Reasoning: We support the work done by Plurality Labs and this proposal introcudes several improvements that will help the delegates (and the DAO) to better follow the development of this milestone.

7

Voting Actions 2024 - March 4th – March 8th

Proposal: ARDC Research Member Election
Vote: Blockworks/Delphi Digital
Reasoning: While both applicants have a sound reputation on the topics under the responsibility of ARDC’s research member, Blockworks/Delphi Digital is better positioned to fulfil all required duties.

Proposal: ARDC DAO Advocate Election
Vote: L2BEAT/Ant Federation
Reasoning: L2BEAT is a perfect fit for the Advocate role, as we have seen on all proposals and governance discussions, and will be a central piece to make the ARDC function in an optimised way.

Proposal: ARDC Security Member Election
Vote: OpenZeppelin
Reasoning: Considering their long-standing reputation in smart contract security, OpenZeppelin is our first choice for this position. We are fully confident in their ability to provide review proposals, code and perform with any project management needs related to the security ember role.

Proposal: ARDC Risk Member Election
Vote: Elect Chaos Labs
Reasoning: Chaos Labs has shown itself to be a reliable partner on other protocols/ecosystems, and we are glad to support their application to the Risk Member position in the ARDC election.

Proposal: [Non-Emergency Action] Fix Fee Oversight ArbOS v20 “Atlas”
Vote: Set L1 surplus fee and L2 minimum base fee.
Reasoning: Despite the significant reduction in fees resulting from this fix, we believe this is the correct action. It will keep Arbitrum competitive against other L2s and promote the long-term residency of the users on the network.

8

Voting Actions 2024 - March 11th – March 15th

Proposal: Request for Continuation of the Arbitrum DDA Program Request
Vote: For
Reasoning: The Questbook grant program was well managed, had a large number of applications and showed the potential of this type of program within the Arbitrum Ecosystem. We support this extension and look forward to the new projects that will result from it.

Proposal: [Non-Constitutional AIP] Front-end interface to force transaction inclusion during sequencer downtime
Vote: For
Reasoning: We support this proposal as it will provide a user-friendly way to execute transactions while the sequencer is down. This is important as we aim to increase the number of non-technical users, and we should provide them with a UX as smoothly as possible.

9

Voting Actions 2024 - March 18th – March 22nd

Proposal: Expand Tally Support for the Arbitrum DAO
Vote: For
Reasoning: Tally does a great job handling the on-chain votes for Arbitrum, and we believe that the newly added features are welcome and the asking is reasonable. We support this proposal.

Proposal: Catalyze Arbitrum Gaming: HADOUKEN!
Vote: Against
Reasoning: The value seems off for something that was not tested before. While we agree that the proposal is meaningful, we would like to see something with a smaller scale before going full-throttle.

Proposal: [[Non-constitutional] Proposal to fund Plurality Labs Milestone 1B(ridge)] (Tally | Arbitrum Proposal)
Vote: For
Reasoning: We supported this proposal on the Snapshot phase and the reasoning remains the same.

10

Voting Actions 2024 - March 25th – March 29th

Proposal: Double-Down on STIP Successes (STIP-Bridge)
Vote: For
Reasoning: The STIP Bridge is crucial to continuing the support of incentive programs and increasing the competitiveness of Arbitrum.

Proposal: Arbitrum Stable Treasury Endowment Program
Vote: Abstain
Reasoning: We support the STEP program and believe it will be essential to the plan to diversify the Arbitrum treasury, but as members of the STEP committee, we felt it was appropriate to abstain.