Following conversations with the Arbitrum Foundation, we’d like to update delegates on a decision that was made regarding the approved procedures and Security Council Elections. The proposed Election Standards will apply only to Snapshot votes, rationale is as follows:
First, it is not currently possible to shield onchain elections. When the initial conversation on shielded voting was raised to the DAO, the title clearly communicated that it was for Snapshot votes only - “Should the DAO Default to using Shielded Voting for Snapshot Votes?”. However, we realize now that the language is not as explicit in this follow up proposal.
Second, while the Arbitrum Foundation can remove candidates that have violated the Responsible Voting Policy during the nomination phase, removing a candidate that violates this policy during the election phase can only be done in two ways, each of which is very challenging:
- An onchain vote for removal with at least 10% of all Votable Tokens have casted votes either “in favor” of removal or “abstain”, and at least 5/6 (83.33%) of all casted votes are “in favor” of removal
- At least 9 of the Security Council members vote in favor of removal.
As per the Arbitrum DAO constitution, the retroactive removal of an elected Security Council candidate would leave the seat unfilled until the following election.
Lastly, after a deeper review of the Arbitrum Constitution, the current language has been interpreted as such that an approval of an onchain Constitutional AIP is required to change the rules of future Security Council Elections. While the Constitution also grants the Arbitrum Foundation the authority to issue new procedures and guidelines for offchain components of the Security Council Elections, following a discussion with the Arbitrum Foundation, they have advised that the Election Standards as outlined in this proposal should apply only to Snapshot votes during the 6 month trial. After which, a more focused conversation can be held to discuss updating the Security Council Election procedures and incorporated into the onchain proposal. Given the Foundation’s authority on the issue, we believe this recommendation should be respected.
Clarifying language has been added to the Election Standards section in this post outlining the Updates to the Arbitrum DAO Procedures in the Announcements section. A refined version (removed sentences calling for delegate input & slight sentence restructuring to account for it passing Snapshot) of the Code of Conduct has also been posted in the Announcements section. Going forward, these posts should be regarded as the most up to date and active versions until the trial period concludes.