I’ve cast my votes for Michael Lewellen, bartek.eth, and yoav.eth in the Security Council election.
Michael Lewellen brings crucial hands-on security expertise from his work with Immunefi and substantial background in smart contract security. In governance, technical competence must take priority over political considerations - especially when dealing with protocol security.I admire the way he communicate on the security council call being extremely communicative which is also a very important characteristic to have in the team
bartek.eth has demonstrated consistent engagement in our ecosystem and has the technical chops needed for incident response. His work across multiple protocols gives him the perspective to assess risks effectively without unnecessary bureaucracy.
yoav.eth offers a strong mix of technical skills and governance experience that aligns with my preference for accountability and clear metrics. I also appreciate how he responded when asked why he’s not participating so much in governance - he was straight up about only voting where he has expertise (security) instead of pretending to know everything. That kind of self-awareness is exactly what we need.
Security Council members must have both technical understanding and the judgment to know when not to intervene - all three candidates demonstrate this balance. The protocol’s long-term value depends on having competent technical minds that understand their role is to address genuine emergencies while respecting DAO dynamics.