Voting Actions July 8th - 12th
Proposal: Approval of STEP committee recommendations
Vote: For
Reasoning: We believe the STEP committee has the right skills to provide valuable recommendations.
Voting Actions July 15th - 19th
Proposal: Improving Predictability in Arbitrum DAOâs Operations
Vote: #1 Improving Predictability, #2 Pedictability, Approval Process, #3 Abstain, #4 Against
Reasoning: As the Arbitrum ecosystem grows, we find it helpful to have a more structured approach to posting proposals.
Proposal: Entropy Advisors: Exclusively Working With Arbitrum DAO
Vote: Fund Entropy
Reasoning: We believe in the ability of Entropyâs founders and their team to positively contribute to creating an efficient operations structure for Arbitrum DAO.
Proposal: Pilot for a Questbook Jumpstart fund for problem definition and DAO improvement
Vote: Against
Reasoning: We are against this initiative as we believe at this time the DAO should focus on optimising costs and cutting on unnecessary expenses.
Voting Actions August 5th - 9th
Proposal: [Non-constitutional] Incentives Detox Proposal
Vote: For
Reasoning: We agree on pausing incentive programs for 3 months and resetting the initiative.
Proposal: [Constitutional] ArbOS 31 âBiancaâ (Stylus, RIP-7212 Support, Nova Fee Router)
Vote: For
Reasoning: We are in favour of activating ArbOS 31 to upgrade the system.
Proposal: Arbitrum Multi-sig Support Service (MSS)
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for the initiative, we voted in favour.
Voting Actions August 12th - 16th
Proposal: Entropy Advisors: Exclusively Working With Arbitrum DAO
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for this initiative, we voted in favour.
Proposal: ARB Staking: Unlock ARB Utility and Align Governance
Vote: For
Reasoning: We are in favour of enabling ARB staking to further incentivise active governance participation by allowing token holders to capture value while delegating.
Proposal: Transparency and Standardized Metrics for Orbit Chains
Vote: For
Reasoning: We are in favour of standardising metrics for Orbit Chains.
Proposal: ArbitrumDAO Governance Analytics Dashboard
Vote: For
Reasoning: We are in favour of having additional transparency on governance initiatives and, specifically, tracking the impact of (Re)delegation Week.
Voting Actions August 19th - 23rd
Proposal: Should the DAO Default to using Shielded Voting for Snapshot Votes?
Vote: For Elections Only
Reasoning: We support shielded voting as a privacy-preserving mechanism for elections to give a fairer chance to candidates.
Proposal: Proposal to Temporary Extend Delegate Incentive System.
Vote: For
Reasoning: We believe the delegate incentive program has a positive impact for the Arbitrum DAO and are in favour of extending it.
Proposal: ArbitrumDAO Off-site
Vote: For
Reasoning: We believe IRL targeted discussions on relevant initiatives would be beneficial.
Proposal: An (EIP-4824 powered) daoURI for the Arbitrum DAO
Vote: Against
Reasoning: We are open to leveraging daoURI. However, we voted against since the proposal didnât follow the standard governance process.
Proposal: Should the DAO Create COI & Self Voting Policies?
Vote: FOR: Disclosure policy, FOR: Responsible voting policy, FOR: Strict self-voting policy
Reasoning: We are in favour of making the voting process fairer with more transparency and voting neutrality towards delegatesâ conflict of interests.
Voting Actions August 26th -30th
Proposal: Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship
Vote: #1 Abstain, #2 Panda Partners, # Against, # Unicorn Partners
Reasoning: We think there is an indirect or limited benefit for Arbitrum to sponsor the Attackathon on the Ethereum protocol. For this reason, our two main preferences are Abstain and Panda Partners.
Proposal: Funds to bootstrap the first BoLD validator
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for the BoLD validator initiative, we voted in favour.
Proposal: ARB Staking: Unlock ARB Utility and Align Governance
Vote: For
Reasoning: We are in favour of the ARB token focusing on boosting its governance utility, to reduce the risk of governance attacks and improve the tokenâs attractiveness.
Voting Actions September 9th - 13th
Proposal: Delegate to Voter Enfranchisement Pool â Event Horizon
Vote: For
Reasoning: We are in favour of giving more visibility to underrepresented DAO citizens through this initiative.
Proposal: ArbitrumDAO Procurement Committee Phase II
Vote: Yes-Extend
Reasoning: Based on the contributions provided, we are in favour of extending the ADPC mandate for an additional 6 months.
Proposal: Synthetix LTIP Grant Extension Request
Vote: Against
Reasoning: While we appreciate the reasoning behind this proposal, the new product launch referred to is outside of the scope of the allocated incentive. Specifically, there isnât sufficient information to evaluate whether the new product will gather traction and benefit the Arbitrum ecosystem. For this reason, we voted against the proposal.
Proposal: Fund the Stylus Sprint
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for the Stylus initiative and its positive contribution to the ecosystem, we are in favour of approving funding for the Stylus Sprint.
Proposal: [Aave DAO] LTIPP Grant Extension Request
Vote: For
Reasoning: The rationale behind the LTIPP incentives is to encourage user activity and growth. Based on this, we agree it is better to extend the deadline to enable ARB distribution at a reasonable rate rather than rushing the distribution. For this reason, we vote in favour of the proposal.
Proposal: Constitutional AIP: Proposal to adopt Timeboost, a new transaction ordering policy
Vote: Collect bids in ETH to treasury
Reasoning: Continuing our support for the Timeboost initiative, we voted in favour of this proposal. Additionally, we voted to collect bids in ETH to treasury to streamline the process for users and continue contributing to the DAO Treasury.
Proposal: ArbitrumDAO Off-site
Vote: #1 IRL/conference/scholarship, #2 IRL/conference/no scholarship, #3 IRL/separate/scholarship, #4 IRL/separate/scholarship, #5 Online event, #6 Abstain, #7 Drop idea and do nothing
Reasoning: We are in favour of organising an Off-site and believe the IRL approach is significantly more effective. Considering the time and cost constraints of the participants, our preferred option is to aggregate it to a major conference.
Voting Actions September 16th - 20th
Proposal: Terms of Tenure for STEP program manager
Vote: #1 Additional funds for one year, #2 Abstain, #3 6 months from available funds, #4 New election at $86,581 per year, #5 Liquidation of RWAs and STEP
Reasoning: With the aim of guaranteeing continuity to these initiatives, our first preference is to dedicate additional funds. However, we want to highlight the importance of a proper review at the 12 months mark.
Voting Actions September 23rd - 27th
Proposal: GovHack Devcon in Bangkok - Hack Humanity
Vote: Abstain
Reasoning: While we appreciate the GovHack initiative, we see it as partially overlapping with the Arbitrum Off-site. Ideally, weâd like to see the two initiatives either merge or specifically target different audiences and goals.
Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Funds to Bolster Foundationâs Strategic Partnerships Budget
Vote: For
Reasoning: We are in favour of funding the Arbitrum Foundation for them to have a more hands-on role on strategic partnerships. However, given this additional significant spending item, we encourage the community to think more towards revenue-generating activities for the DAO.
Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum DAO Delegate Incentive Program
Vote: FOR - DIP V1.5
Reasoning: We are in favour of continuing the delegates incentive program. Specifically, we believe considering overall contributions throughout the month is a superior way to encourage active participation, rather than just considering a subset of proposals.
Voting Actions September 30th - October 4th
Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Whitelist Infura Nova Validator
Vote: Whitelist Infura Validator
Reasoning: Infura has years of experience in the industry and we believe they will bring positive contributions to the Arbitrum ecosystem.
Proposal: Research on context and retention
Vote: For
Reasoning: We voted in favour of this research as it can provide valuable insights on the effectiveness of community governance and, hopefully, highlight any improvements that can be made in that regard. Because Arbitrum DAO has one of the most active communities in the industry, we believe it being a good case-study for this topic.
Proposal: An EIP-4824 powered daoURI for Arbitrum DAO
Vote: For - use ENS text records
Reasoning: We are in favour of Arbitrum DAO adapting to the standard as it has already been reviewed and supported by multiple players.
Proposal: UPDATED - Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship
Vote: For
Reasoning: In line with our Snapshot vote, we are in favour of sponsoring the Attackathon with the smaller sponsorship package (Panda Partners) given the limited impact it will have on the Arbitrum ecosystem.
Proposal: [NON-CONSTITUTIONAL] Arbitrum DAO Procurement Committee: Phase II Proposal
Vote: For
Reasoning: We are in favour of extending the mandate of the Arbitrum DAO Procurement Committee for an additional 6 months and recommend conducting an in-depth assessment of their work at the end of the period.
Proposal: Constitutional AIP - Extend Delay on L2Time Lock
Vote: For
Reasoning: We are in favour of extending the delay on the L2 Time lock as suggested.
Voting Actions October 7th - 11th
Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Funds to Bolster Foundationâs Strategic Partnerships Budget
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for this proposal, we have voted in favour.
Proposal: ArbitrumDAO strategic âOff-siteâ (online) updated proposal
Vote: Abstain
Reasoning: We decided to abstain as we see the value of an ArbitrumDAO Off-site to align stakeholders, but would have preferred for the initiative to be hosted IRL.
Proposal: Enhancing Multichain Governance: Upgrading RARI Governance Token on Arbitrum
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for this initiative, we voted in favour.
Voting Actions October 14th - 18th
Proposal: LTIPP Retroactive Community Funding Selections
Vote: Abstain
Reasoning: We voted abstain as we donât have sufficient context on these projects and their contributions to the Arbitrum ecosystem. We suggest the LTIPP committee should make this decision.
Proposal: Establishing a DAO Events Budget for 2025
Vote: For
Reasoning: We are in favour of having a more structured way of managing expenses across the Arbitrum DAO and believe this proposal aligns with that. Two overlapping initiatives were proposed for the upcoming Devcon, which proved the need for a more coordinated effort on the events front.
Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum DAO Delegate Incentive Program
Vote: For
Reasoning: We are in favour of extending the Delegate Incentive Program and adjusting the selection criteria as proposed to encourage the active participation of delegates.
Proposal: Fund the Stylus Sprint
Vote: For
Reasoning: Stylus represents a major milestone for Arbitrum and a key element in expanding the chainâs target audience. We are in favour of the DAO aligning with this and supporting via the Stylus Sprint program.
Proposal: Security Council Member Election
Vote: John Morrow, Griff Green, Dennison Bertram
Reasoning: We believe John Morrow, Griff Green, and Dennison Bertram to be active members of the Arbitrum ecosystem and have the relevant expertise for this role.
Voting Actions October 21st - 25th
Proposal: (V2) Arbitrum Research & Development Collective
Vote: Fund with 1.73M USDC + Council
Reasoning: We voted in favour of supporting the work of the ARDC. However, we doubt the need for a Supervisory Council as its stated goals should be fundamental to the ARDCâs structure, without requiring an additional layer of oversight. Additionally, we see a risk of overlapping roles between the ARDC, Entropy Advisors and the Arbitrum Foundation.
Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum Token Swap Pilot Program
Vote: Against
Reasoning: We voted against this proposal as Token Swaps should be part of or done in alignment with a larger Treasury Management operation, and not as a standalone initiative.
Proposal: GCP Council Re-Confirmation Vote for Tim Chang
Vote: Reconfirm Tim Chang to GCPC
Reasoning: We believe continuity is essential to see progress through the initiative, for this reason we voted to reconfirm Tim Chang.
Proposal: GCP Council Re-Confirmation Vote for John Kennedy
Vote: Reconfirm John Kennedy to GCPC
Reasoning: We believe continuity is essential to see progress through the initiative, for this reason we voted to reconfirm John Kennedy.
Voting Actions October 28th - November 1st
Proposal: Adopt a Delegate Code of Conduct & Formalize Operations
Vote: For
Reasoning: We are in favour of adopting a Code of Conduct and Formalize Operations. We believe the proposed structure is comprehensive and effective to enable efficient governance processes and reduce governance fatigue.
Proposal: (V2) Arbitrum Research & Development Collective
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for this initiative, we voted in favour.
Proposal: Establishing a DAO Events Budget for 2025
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for this initiative, we voted in favour.
Voting Actions November 18th - 22nd
Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Treasury Management v1.2
Vote: For
Reasoning: We believe active management over the Arbitrum DAO treasury will provide tangible benefits. This proposal is a first step in the right direction, hence our vote in favour.
However, we urge Entropy to expand the initiative and follow a more comprehensive treasury management approach that can ensure the DAOâs long-term financial sustainability.
Additionally, we want to highlight that there was no DAO vote or tendering process to select committee members. If this mandate is expanded, this should be a requirement.
Voting Actions November 25th - 29th
Proposal: Restitution For Extensively Delayed ArbitrumDAO Minigrant Winners
Vote: For
Reasoning: While we agree with the point raised by various validators that volatility is to be expected when receiving a grant in ARB, we are in favour of a reimbursement in this case. Arbitrum DAO delayed the release of the grant by several months, impacting funding and operations of these smaller projects. Given the limited cost for the DAO, we believe we should prioritise community builders.
Proposal: Hackathon Continuation Program
Vote: In favour, yes onchain mechanism
Reasoning: We believe improving retention of projects building on Arbitrum is essential for the growth of the ecosystem. As this initiative goes in that direction, we voted in favour.
Voting Actions December 2nd - 6th
Proposal: [Non-consitutional] User Research: Why build on Arbitrum?
Vote: Arbitrum + 2 others (SOL + OP)
Reasoning: We believe this market research will give Arbitrum stakeholders valuable insights on how to retain builders and grow the ecosystem. We voted for the research to cover Arbitrum and two other ecosystems so as to include a comparison with competitors, which is key to spotting our competitive advantage.
Proposal: Designing and operating the reporting and information function
Vote: Against
Reasoning: We believe the idea is valuable, but weâd like to see a more simple and streamlined operation as well as a reduced budget. We voted against the current implementation for these reasons. We are open to supporting the proposal with a different configuration.
Proposal: Arbitrum D.A.O. Domain Allocator Offerings) Grant Program - Season 3
Vote: Renew with 5 domains (adding Orb)
Reasoning: Building on the success of the previous seasons, we are in favour of renewing the grant program for Season 3. As Arbitrum Orbits is one of the key developments for the ecosystem, we supporting adding a dedicated track for it.
Proposal: [NON-CONSTITUTIONAL] Arbitrum Onboarding V2: A Governance Bootcamp
Vote: For
Reasoning: Arbitrum DAO is a complex ecosystem to navigate, due to its abundance of delegates and articulated structure with multiple committees, programs and initiatives. We believe a Governance Bootcamp can lower the entry barrier for joining Arbitrum DAO, while bringing high-value contributors to the DAO.
Proposal: ARDC (V2) Supervisory Council Election
Vote: 50% Frisson, 50% Jameskbh
Reasoning: We believe these to be active contributors to the Arbitrum DAO, knowledgeable and proactive. They have the best interest of Arbitrum at heart and act accordingly in their voting, suggestions and general contributions. For these reasons, we think they are a good fit for the Supervisory Council.
Proposal: ARDC (V2) Research Election
Vote: 50% Llama Research & Castle Capital, 50% Blockworks Advisory
Reasoning: We believe these two entities to provide the best balance between budget requested and expected quality of the output.
Proposal: ARDC (V2) Risk Election
Vote: Nethermind
Reasoning: We believe the firm to be a well-recognised and trusted entity in the space, who can provide value add for Arbitrum.
Proposal: ARDC (V2) Security Election
Vote: OpenZeppelin
Reasoning: While we recognise both candidates are well-established security firms that would provide value to Arbitrum, we believe OpenZeppelin has the most compelling proposal and most cost-effective budget.
Proposal: Arbitrum Hackathon Builder Continuation Program
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for the initiative, we voted in favour.
Proposal: Treasury Management V1.2
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for the initiative, we voted in favour.
Voting Actions Dec 16th - 20th
Proposal: Unifying Arbitrumâs Mission, Vision, Purpose (MVP)
Vote: For
Reasoning: We believe that establishing a shared mission, vision, and purpose is crucial for any organization, including DAOs, to operate effectively. In the case of Arbitrum, this approach can provide clarity in setting goals and performance metrics for its various initiatives while enhancing communication. Currently, both of these areas are weaknesses for the Arbitrum DAO, and we see this as an essential step toward transforming them into strengths.
Proposal: Partner with ETH Bucharest 2025
Vote: Abstain
Reasoning: While the event seems interesting, we believe this proposal should be evaluated and, if appropriate, funded by the âEducation, Community Growth and Eventsâ domain of the Arbitrum D.A.O. Grant Program.
Proposal: OpCo â A DAO-adjacent Entity for Strategy Execution
Vote: For
Reasoning: We strongly support the idea of having more operational coordination within Arbitrum DAO. While rich with ideas and initiatives, the current unstructured structure makes it difficult to effectively allocate resources and achieve goals. We appreciate the work Entropy Advisors put into proposing a DAO-wide OpCo initiative and support moving forward with it.