After consideration, the @SEEDgov delegation has decided to split our voting power among the following candidates:
- 25% to A.J. Warner
- 25% to Patrick McCorry
- 50% to Pedro Breuer
Rationale
As an important note, we believe the outcome of the vote shifted when someone acquired LobbyFi’s 20 million VP in favor of one of the candidates.
From that moment on, the election moved from a process of “voting for the candidate we believe is best prepared for the role” to “voting strategically to ensure the feasibility of the OpCo.” In this context, we believe most delegates are concentrating their votes on certain candidates to ensure they surpass the 20M threshold. We are no exception; to prevent further vote dispersion, we have decided to cast votes for only three candidates. This is also why we are writing a rationale in advance for a shuttered vote.
OpCo is undoubtedly one of the most significant experiments in the DAO’s history, and its success would drive Arbitrum’s success. This entity is perfectly positioned to handle both operational tasks and service provider procurement, alleviating pressure from both the AF and delegates when making decisions. For this reason, the board must consist of individuals who are as aligned with Arbitrum as possible and who genuinely represent the diverse stakeholders within this community.
Regarding AJ and Patrick, it is clear that this entity will require initial support from OCL and AF to shape its structure. In this regard, we believe both candidates are 100% Arbitrum-aligned, which gives us confidence that they will do everything possible to ensure this effort is not in vain.
It is important to highlight that one of the OAT’s responsibilities is to coordinate with these entities to align around the Arbitrum ecosystem objectives:
Furthermore, once the foundational structure of the OpCo is established, the OAT will have authority over service provider and individual contributor contracts:
This implies substantial power over the vast majority of initiatives (if not all), which, in our view, should be more balanced in favor of independent delegates who are not directly involved in those initiatives. This is why we advocate for a different OAT composition in the second year, as it is well known that the Arbitrum Foundation has been involved in multiple initiatives and even acts as a Service Provider to the DAO through the Arbitrum Audit Program.
Regarding Pedro, it is not only about his background but also about having had the opportunity to meet him personally, observe his contributions as a delegate for over a year, and recognize that he has no biases or conflicts of interest beyond his role in the DIP. We believe he is the best-positioned candidate to represent the DAO’s delegates interests.
As we have mentioned before, it is expected that AF and OCL will be part of the committee in the first year. While these entities and delegates are all supposed to be on the same team—since we all want Arbitrum to succeed—it is crucial that the third member is someone sufficiently critical and independent to represent the delegates within this committee faithfully.