Lampros DAO Delegate Communication Thread

[Euphoria]

Snapshot Votes

---

1. Arbitrum Treasury Management Council - Consolidating Efforts
   Voted - FOR
   Reason -

@Euphoria

The following reflects the views of the Lampros DAO governance team, composed of Chain_L (@Blueweb) and @Euphoria, based on our combined research, analysis, and ideation.

We are voting FOR this proposal in the Snapshot voting.

We believe merging the TMC, GMC, and STEP into one council is the right move for Arbitrum’s treasury. We believe this new Council design addresses many of the pain points that arose under TMC, GMC, and STEP. It’s encouraging to see that leftover funds will be used smartly for specialist help where needed, without creating new salaries.

That said, while we support the direction, we want to share some thoughts:

@Entropy

while the proposed structure does position OAT as a final reviewer for decisions made by the Council, this is meant to function more as a governance backstop rather than a body actively driving asset allocation decisions.

We see this point and agree with what others like @bertani mentioned, the OAT was not originally designed for financial oversight. Over time, it may make sense for the Council to help the OAT develop stronger treasury literacy or bring in a neutral advisor for more technical allocation checks.

@Entropy

the DAO will approve the goals of each treasury allocation prior to moving funds

We appreciate this clarity and also agree with @Camelot that balancing yield and growth is always a tricky dance. It would be helpful if the Council could share, maybe in future budget requests, a simple rubric that explains when we intentionally lean more toward ecosystem growth vs strict APR targets.

@Entropy

Entropy will be taking on the role of reporting under this proposal. We will have live dashboards (ideally with a custom frontend

We like the move away from just Dune dashboards. A question: could we have a clear service level for this? For example, that major treasury movements get reflected within 24 hours, and quarterly reports come out within 15 days after each quarter ends. This sets shared expectations for everyone.

@Tane

We strongly advocate for a clearly articulated, transparent, and accountable selection mechanism

We echo this too. It’s good to see the plan to post rationales for SP choices. One practical idea: maybe an open shortlisting or lightweight RFP for big vendor hires could build trust, without adding too much friction.

@CastleCapital

If a decision turns out to be flawed or controversial, the only way to undo it is through a full council disbandment.

This works as a hard backstop, but it might help the DAO if we also had a softer option. For example, if there’s a major reallocation, say 10% of AUM or more, perhaps the Council could post it and allow a 5-day comment window before execution.

Finally, we want to echo what @Jose_StableLab suggested, a short post-mortem covering lessons learned from TMC, GMC, and STEP would be really valuable. It would help new contributors understand which parts worked and which bottlenecks to avoid as we shift to this single council.

Overall, we see this as an overdue cleanup that gives the DAO more cohesion and clearer checks than what we had before.

---

2. [Constitutional] AIP: Remove Cost Cap on Arbitrum Nova
   Voted - FOR
   Reason -

@Euphoria

The following reflects the views of the Lampros DAO governance team, composed of Chain_L (@Blueweb) and @Euphoria, based on our combined research, analysis, and ideation.

We are voting FOR this proposal in the Snapshot voting.

Removing the amortized cost cap on Nova makes sense given EIP-4844 and Orbit adoption. It aligns Nova’s costs with its current role and avoids unnecessary subsidies.

As mentioned earlier, we encourage clear communication with affected projects and batch posters, with timelines and dedicated channels to ensure a smooth transition and clarity on migration options to Arbitrum One or Orbit if needed.

---

Tally Votes

---

1. [CONSTITUTIONAL] Register the Sky Custom Gateway contracts in the Router
   Voted - FOR
   Reason -

@Euphoria

The following reflects the views of the Lampros DAO governance team, composed of Chain_L (@Blueweb) and @Euphoria, based on our combined research, analysis, and ideation.

We are voting FOR this proposal in the Tally voting.

Our reasoning remains the same as we shared during the Snapshot vote: registering Sky’s custom gateways is a practical fix that makes bridging USDS and sUSDS smoother for everyone, without adding new costs or unnecessary risks for the DAO.

One point we want to stress again is that these kinds of routine technical updates should ideally not need full governance cycles each time. Delegates end up relying on OCL and the AF for technical checks anyway. It makes sense to trust them to handle this directly for a limited period, with clear updates to keep the community in the loop.

This small change improves user experience today and can help us build a more efficient process for similar requests going forward.

---

2. [Constitutional] AIP: Constitutional Quorum Threshold Reduction
   Voted - FOR
   Reason -

@Euphoria

The following reflects the views of the Lampros DAO governance team, composed of Chain_L (@Blueweb) and @Euphoria, based on our combined research, analysis, and ideation.

We are voting FOR this proposal in the Tally voting.

The current 5% quorum is tough to reach with today’s voter turnout and larger ARB supply. Dropping it slightly to 4.5% keeps constitutional proposals from getting stuck for no good reason.

We see this as a simple, safe fix that costs nothing and avoids governance deadlock. As mentioned before, we prefer a clear review after a specific time, be it six months, so this does not stay fixed forever.

While this helps for now, the main goal should still be to improve turnout so higher quorums are easy to meet in future votes.