OpCo – Oversight and Transparency Committee (OAT) Elections

[Entropy]

First, we would like to recognize that this cohort of individuals is extremely strong, and this decision was not an easy one. After discussion, Entropy has decided to vote ⅓ for Frisson, ⅓ for AJ, and ⅓ for Pat.

It is our strong belief that it is essential for the initial members of the OAT to have extreme familiarity with Arbitrum One, Arbitrum’s wide range of contributors and partners, and the Arbitrum DAO in order for OpCo to be successful. While several OAT candidates possess this knowledge, our decision was led by the belief that these 3 applicants and their skill sets complement each other exceptionally well, forming a well-rounded committee.

Since day one, Frisson has been a leader of several of the DAO’s initiatives, like the MSS, ARDC, and staking working group. His experience in Arbitrum governance, and DAOs in general, spans beyond that of almost anyone else, and it has rightfully earned him wide-ranging respect across the delegate base. Frisson possesses strong skills and extensive experience in hiring, managing teams, and, most importantly, is a die-hard believer in Arbitrum and the power of decentralized governance, establishing him as an individual that we’re 100% confident will have Arbitrum and the DAO’s best interest in mind when it comes to OpCo’s role. In summary, through his position at Tally and work within the DAO, he brings a unique perspective, network, and information that will complement Pat and AJ extremely well if all 3 are elected.

As one of the original architects of Arbitrum governance, AJ brings arguably the most unique perspective of Arbitrum DAO and its evolution to the OAT. In his role as the Chief Strategy Officer at Offchain Labs, he is widely respected and recognized throughout the industry for his unwavering commitment to Arbitrum. His vast experience in business development, as well as hiring and managing large Arbitrum-focused teams, makes him exceptionally qualified for the OAT role. His deep understanding and ties to Arbitrum protocols, service providers, and pretty much anyone else interacting professionally with the technology are critical in ensuring OpCo’s success. We are confident in saying that there is nobody more aligned and passionate about making sure Arbitrum wins, and we feel very fortunate to have him in the applicant pool.

Pat is a highly respected Ethereum researcher, a voice of diplomacy, and resourceful beyond belief. With Pat on the OAT, we are confident that OpCo will have the guidance it needs to properly experiment and execute in its early days while its mandate is still transforming. Pat often remains behind the scenes, but he has been instrumental in shaping several of Arbitrum’s and the DAO’s most successful initiatives. His first principles research mindset and openness for experimentation will be key to OpCo fulfilling its evolving mandate.

As a team, we have extreme confidence in Frisson, AJ, and Pat leading the OpCo to success.

[paulofonseca]

I feel it’s weird to me for @Entropy to be managing an election that has an active shielded vote in progress, and then to reveal their vote choices in a public forum.

Of all available courses of action, where you could have equally distributed your voting power to all delegates equally (effectively abstaining as the entity running this election), or could have casted a shielded vote in any candidates you chose and only post the rationale after the vote ends…

you’ve chosen to cast a vote endorsing 3 specific candidates in an election you are managing, and to reveal those endorsements in a public forum while the vote is still running… I don’t know how else to say it… it feels like you’re not stewarding this particular election process in a credibly neutral way. Specially since I think you’ve never done this for any other shielded election vote previously.

[Argonaut]

This was a really tough decision, and it’s an important election, so we carefully chose the candidates and how we weighted them. We believe all of them are capable of doing the job, but we based our choice on dedication to the DAO, experience, and background. Chris Cameron stood out the most across all of those areas.

Chris Cameron - 58.3%
Pedro Breuer - 25%
Joseph Schiarizzi- 8.3%
Edgar Prediger - 8.3%

We also ruled out several candidates due to potential conflicts of interest or concerns around decentralization. So, some candidates who are service providers or part of the Arbitrum Foundation were not considered by us.

[Curia]

For the OAT Committee election, we’re voting equally (25% each) for @Frisson , @ajwarner90 , @stonecoldpat , @pedrob

These five bring the right mix of experience, trust, and alignment to set up OpCo for success.
Frisson has consistently stepped up in key DAO initiatives.
AJ brings deep ecosystem insight and strong ties to builders.
Pat offers a research-driven, diplomatic approach with a clear understanding of DAO and Foundation dynamics.
Pedro is detail-oriented, thoughtful, and has contributed meaningfully without seeking the spotlight.

[Euphoria]

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

We want to start by expressing our heartfelt gratitude to all the candidates who applied for these roles. Each of you brings unique skills and perspectives, making this decision challenging. After careful consideration of all applications and attending the candidate’s pitch call, we have decided to split our votes equally as follows:

@ajwarner90 possesses a deep understanding of Arbitrum’s historical context and strategic needs, having played a key role in its developmental phases as CSO at Offchain Labs. His experience is particularly valuable for the OAT’s responsibility to oversee strategic execution and ensure alignment with long-term objectives.

@Frisson has consistently demonstrated exceptional leadership and dedication across various DAO initiatives and in the working group. His hands-on experience with DAO operations and communications provides him with the insight necessary to oversee OpCo’s daily management and operational compliance or the key responsibilities of the OAT.

@stonecoldpat brings an essential mix of academic and practical blockchain expertise. His background is ideal for supporting the OAT’s role in fostering innovative solutions and ensuring that strategic initiatives are grounded in solid, research-backed methodologies.

The combination of AJ, Frisson, and Patrick will greatly benefit the OAT Committee. Each candidate is well-suited to meet the diverse challenges of the role, from ensuring OpCo’s accountability to spearheading strategic initiatives that drive growth and sustainability within the Arbitrum ecosystem.

By electing AJ Warner, Frisson, and Patrick, we are confident that the OAT will excel in its crucial duties, uphold the highest standards of governance and transparency, and ensure the effective execution of Arbitrum’s SOS and long-term goals.

[maxlomu]

gm, here’s my dream team:

A.J. Warner 33% - very much needed connector with OCL. His vision to develop new business lines for the DAO resonated with me - and his experience in driving partnerships will be key for OpCo to succeed.

Pedro Breuer 33% - Strong legal background, attention to details, passion for public goods. He will help OpCo navigate around operational and legal issues.

Joseph Schiarizzi 17% - Builder on Arbitrum. Bold vision. He knows first hand what builders need, and will fight tooth and nails to support them.

Federico Daffina 17% - I like that he has experience in ecosystems different from Arbitrum. We need a diverse breath of perspectives and Federico can bring that, particurlarly for funding projects and initiatives.

[JoJo]

Don’t have any horse in this race but want to answer this.

@paulofonseca

I feel it’s weird to me for @Entropy to be managing an election that has an active shielded vote in progress, and then to reveal their vote choices in a public forum.

This is something we discuss in every election: we have shielding, but delegates post their preferences. Again, this can be done and is not against anything we voted in the code of conduct.

@paulofonseca

Of all available courses of action, where you could have equally distributed your voting power to all delegates equally (effectively abstaining as the entity running this election), or could have casted a shielded vote in any candidates you chose and only post the rationale after the vote ends…

you’ve chosen to cast a vote endorsing 3 specific candidates in an election you are managing, and to reveal those endorsements in a public forum while the vote is still running…

Sorry but why should they abstain, or not disclose their vote? As you know, Entropy voted against the OpCo on Tally.
To me a logic path is the following: if I am against a certain initiative, and it passes instead, then I have one reason more to cast my vote for the people running it and disclosing it, because I was against in the first place. I dare to say I am likely even more motivated than people voting in favour since is possible that these set of delegates is just more focused on the initiative and might have a not so strong preference on candidates.
Really, I don’t see why they should have abstained honestly.

@paulofonseca

I don’t know how else to say it… it feels like you’re not stewarding this particular election process in a credibly neutral way. Specially since I think you’ve never done this for any other shielded election vote previously.

Sorry but, why should they be neutral in the first place? They even voted against in Tally, not abstain. In that situation, I don’t remember you calling out Entropy for credible neutrality, so why is this different now?

[CastleCapital]

The election of the OAT is one we have pondered for some time. It was honestly a difficult decision for us to make but we agree with @JoJo on the points he’s raised.

@JoJo

In electing OAT members, we have to rely not only in the public figure reputation, skillset, specific knowledge, past but in the trust we can put in whoever is going to be elected. The people in there will be entrusted in choose the right persons to start this company, on behalf of the DAO and in the best interest of the DAO.

Implicitely, this suggest to me that

1. is going to be hard to vote for people that have never had prominent roles or presence in our DAO: trust can’t be build in a single day
2. is going to be hard to vote for people who have, involuntarily or voluntarily, harmed the DAO or the DAO reputation outside our (rather small) circle: I personally can’t trust the OAT candidates who have, in past, created situations harmful for the DAO/AF/OCL operations without first doing as much as they could to reach out interested parties. This is not about having/not having the same opinions, is about a course of action in what you do that is responsible toward not only people and operations, but also the perception about Arbitrum, especially perception from outside, that we collectively need to defend
3. is going to be hard to vote for people that have a very good professional track record, but no strong reference and presence inside our world: Arbitrum is an ecosystem, a very complex one, and there is a fallacy in thinking that the same approach straight out of the box that has ensured success in a somehow smaller environment can also solve the problems we have here. I am talking about not only strategy, but also communication, approach, even philosophy, and all the characteristics that define a person in his attitude toward a working mission.

Our initial preference was for the following 4 candidates:

• @ajwarner90
• @pedrob
• @Frisson
• @stonecoldpat

However, taking into consideration that we’re not a large delegate, we’ve decided to take a slightly unorthodox approach.

We took the strong assumption that AJ should and would be successfully voted in and that regardless of Pat’s success, the AF would have an observer seat. Therefore, the line of thinking in our decision-making was solving the following question.

Who is the one person we want to see aside AJ and the AF in the OAT?

This had to hold true regardless of the composition of the rest of the OAT, and someone we felt confident had the best interests of Arbitrum as a whole, and the DAO in particular, and who would not be afraid to challenge the status quo or stand up vocally for his opinions.

For this reason, we voted for @pedrob with 100% of our voting power.

[SEEDGov]

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:

@Entropy

Coordination: Actively engage with Offchain Labs and the Arbitrum Foundation to align on deliverables and serve as the liaison between delegates, key stakeholders, the wider DAO, and other DAO-adjacent entities’ oversight committees. The OAT will also initiate a monthly OpCo oversight call for community members to get updates on the most recent developments and for them to have the opportunity to make inquiries. A separate forum section will be created for OpCo.

Furthermore, once the foundational structure of the OpCo is established, the OAT will have authority over service provider and individual contributor contracts:

@Entropy

Once the first internal employees are hired, the OAT would act as the approving authority when OpCo enters into contracts with service providers or individual contributors, as well as greenlight salaries, larger spends, expenses, and budgets, having the authority to challenge decisions made within OpCo that may have a material, negative impact. Moreover, the OAT would be empowered to terminate service provider/individual contributor/etc. contracts as well as fire OpCo’s internal staff

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.

[Griff]

Wow! Truly impressed by everyone who stepped up for the OAT elections! Every single person here is qualified and would do a good job, it was a really hard to choose how to vote…

To make my vote count as much as possible, I’ve distributed it between the three candidates who I believe would be the best trio. They bring complementary stakeholder insights to the table, representing the most critical voices in Arbitrum. My only worry is that they all have a lot on their plates, but I trust they can hire assistants or something so that their oversight can be impactful, without them having to sacrifice too much from their other responsibilities.

Cupofjoe 70% – A true builder shipping non stop. Joe understands the problems builders face because he has been in the trenches with tooling, funding, and coordination challenges. Having this perspective will reflect what builders on the ground really need.

AJ 15% – Best rep for OCL interests. AJ really gets the DAO operations at a practical level. He is my go to person for understanding OCL’s perspective. have shown to take good care of his duties while staying connected to what the ecosystem actually needs.

Patrick 15% – Patrick brings that irreplaceable perspective that only comes from seeing the ecosystem through all its phases. He represent the foundation’s viewpoint while staying connected to the community - exactly the balance we need to keep Arbitrum’s vision on track.

I gave Joe more than AJ and Patrick because I assume the other 2 are for sure going to get in anyway, and only the third slot is under contention (my assumption). Joe is more of a long shot, so I gave him a big bump.

Also, I want to say, Frisson has been an incredibly valuable delegate and would do a fantastic job on the committee. It was really hard not to vote for him. It was hard to decide between him and Joe, but Joe just slightly edged him out, so I pushed all in there.

[ElGordoTony]

I voting 50% for Frisson (Frisson), 50% for Pedro Breuer (pedrob)

• Pedro Breuer (pedrob) I gave him 50% of my vote cuz I have identify myself with he’s opinion on many proposals on the past. I think he’s the right person for this task and I think he has the ability to to make this work.
• Frisson (Frisson) I gave my other 50% of my vote to Frisson because he is also a ver well preapere delegate for this task, he is a very respected delegate and I like his opinions about the creation of OpCo.

[ocandocrypto]

As in @web3citizenxyz representation. Voting for: AJ Warner, Belmin Kalkan and Frisson.

Below the rationale:

Web3 Citizen Delegate Communication Thread

Snapshot: OAT Election We are voting for: Frisson, AJ Warner and 0xRecruiter. Before explaining our rationale for each candidate we’ll list our key identifiers for valuable OAT members. These are consistent with OAT Key Responsibilities as well as the role description Identifiers: candidates who have proven experience in running, leading, hiring and scaling teams, strategic know how and operational experience, engaging with internal and external stakeholders, experience in coordinating cross …

[Tane]

We vote 100% for Frisson.

Following other delegates with not-huge VP and assuming key figures from the core teams will be elected anyway, we have chosen Frisson as the most balanced and suitable representative of the DAO with his all-time involvement and continuous support as a service provider (Tally) and the chair of the important DAO function (MSS).

[Michigan_Blockchain]

We vote a 3 way split between Frission, AJ Warner, and Federico. All three have shown the ability to practice good decision making and technical talent to complete all of the objectives that are necessary for the success of the OpCo’s missions. Frission in particular was a clear choice because of his active involvement within the Arbitrum DAO and Arbitrum providers such as Tally. Federico’s work for other cryptocurrencies and organizations makes him a strong candidate due to his breadth of experience outside Arbitrum, and this experience in particular will make him well-versed to partake in critical decisions. AJ Warner’s work with Offchain is a big portion of why we support his election to the OpCo, and we believe his election will allow Arbitrum to build some much needed lines of communication with Offchain and a potential strategic partnership can materialize.

*BoredApe90

[Saurabh]

After ample discussion and reflection on this crucial election, the GMX Governance Committee has decided to vote for the following candidates and percentage split:

20% A.J. Warner
40% Pedro Breuer
40% Frisson

We also seriously considered Federico, Marc, and Pat. This was a very complex discussion, overall.

There are clearly many qualified candidates applying for these 3 crucial positions, and it was challenging to arrive at a final consensus. Numerous factors played a role in our deliberation, particularly their evident passion for Arbitrum, and the professional experience that we feel makes them highly suited to this oversight role.

[jameskbh]

I voted 33% Ez3real for and 66% for Frisson. As a delegate with low VP, I felt it didn’t make sense to spread it further. Both are good candidates as are able to navigate the DAO landscape, have knowledge of how things work and have something to add to the OAT.

[0xRecruiter]

Thank you for your vote!

[KlausBrave]

I voted strategically 100% for Pedro, as a smaller delegate I followed a similar logic to CastleCapital.

After listening to the OpCo pitches and witnessing Pedro over the last year, his inclusion as a person who is:
high context, competent, forward looking, Arbitrum aligned, not a service provider to Arbitrum
makes him the most neutral and independent of any candidate. This uniquely positions Pedro to play a critical role that is unreplicable by any other candidate to balance and represent the interests of the DAO.
We should strive to empower people who can bring this balancing quality in our people and structures.

[coinflip]

The caliber of candidates has been great and shows how much the Arbitrum ecosystem has grown.

Have put the bulk the voting power behind AJ and Patrick. There is an aspect of this vote being in support of OCL and AF being more involved in helping to ensure that as we setup OpCo while responsive to the DAO its designed to effectively coordinate and be an equal pillar with those two organizations to help grow Arbitrum; but the vote is very much a vote of confidence in their skills, having had the privledge to collaborate with AJ from the earliest days of Arbitrum there is no one more committed to making it win, and my time working with Patrick in the establishment of GCP’s organizational structure and associated activities makes me confident we will be best served with his demenor, approach and practicality.

Beyond my primary votes, i’ve put a small allocation towards Joseph Schiarizzi, Marc Zeller and Frisson. All three are individually accomplished, having spent time in DAOs and running organizations, but most importantly for me they have been builders and I would really like to see us find a way to involve builders again more actively in Arbitrum’s efforts to stimulate growth.
While there will be lots related to good governance talk, it would be great to see a focus on just getting stuff done as well.

If the council that gets elected decides to look for expansion beyond the current set of candidates the five individuals voted for here would all be great choices.

To everyone that participated, thank you for putting yourselves out there.

[EzR3aL]

Although I have not been selected I want to thank anyone voting for me and of course the nominated candidates.
I hope that they will help and establish something great with OpCo which the DAO in my opinion really needs. Otherwise we will simply end the same like we did with GCP.
Transparency is key and I hope all candidates have enough time to do their tasks.
For me nothing will change and I will still be active within the DAO and maybe there will be even other great opportunities where I might fit better if the DAO agrees.