Transparency: Clear communication with votes and explanations of reasoning
Growth: We see great potential for Arbitrum and look forward to helping the chain grow as much as possible
Real-World Use Cases: We see great use cases in the future for RWA and web2/web3 connecting and look forward to seeing where the RWA use cases will go.
Diversification: With Arbitrum controlling the largest DAO treasury in defi currently, we’re excited and always looking forways to diversify and innovatively allocate funding to deserving projects and ideas.
Delegate Statement:
We’re a team of dedicated governance enthusiasts who have been in the crypto governance space for over two years now! Arbitrum is uniquely positioned in defi and with its incredible foundation and treasury, it has some of the most unique governance initiatives we’ve seen across all of defi!
Our primary goal is to use the knowledge we have learned in the past few years to help grow ARB and its community. We’ve been keeping track of ARB since day one and are excited to be here for the ride!
Conflicts of Interest & Resolution:
Abstain from the vote if a situation arises a conflict of interest, and clearly state on forums the conflict.
We voted FOR: This falls nicely in line with one of our main goals for Arbitrum. Sitting with the largest treasury in Web3, we think diversifying a significant amount of this treasury is needed for runway and stability. The team selected has extensive experience with RWAs and stablecoin/treasury diversification and management. We will be keeping a close eye on this topic as it progresses through the difference stages of the governance cycle and subsequent legal and service provider selection.
We voted FOR: We believe this proposal which establishes the ADPC will provide much benefit to the ecosystem through its soon to be established procurement frameworks. So often do companies come to the DAO with their service requests and going forward, this team will be able to properly handle and distribute intake.
Note: This specific on chain vote seemingly did not register on Tally and we are trying to get this fixed. Issues may arise from being near the start of when we first initially received delegation.
We voted FOR: We are voting in line with our prior opinions of support with this program. This is a great way to support a longer term grants program for the DAO and a great way to allocate a significant portion of the DAO’s treasury.
We voted FOR: In similar regards as the prior technical upgrade votes, we are confident in the core team’s decisions for this technical fix and are in support.
We voted FOR: These early contributors should be fairly compensated and we think this spurs overall activity and growth in the ecosystem for future contributors to spur more time here. Retroactive payment shouldn’t be expected but in times like this when well deserved and well funded, they should be rewarded.
Proposal: [Non-Constitutional] Funding for Into the Dungeons: Machinata - a PvP Digital Miniature Game V2 (Snapshot)
We voted AGAINST: This is a pretty cool project and definitely deserves some time and funding, however, should be done through the LTI and other grants programs out there currently.
Changes to the Constitution and the Security Council Election Process (On Chain)
We voted FOR: These changes increase the transparency and effectiveness of the security council and are thankful for the community in creating and executing on this.
We voted AGAINST: This was a tricky vote but at the end of the day, we are voting for this in line with our prior reasoning that we believe such grant and funding should go through grants councils/foundation funding and believe this isn’t distinctive enough to warrant one off funding.
We voted 100% Blockworks/Delphi Digital: We’ve seen these two’s work many times over the last few months and believe they are an appropriate fit for this role.
We voted 100% L2BEAT/Ant Federation: Although we’re not familiar with Ant Federation, we’ve seen these L2Beat’s work many times over the last few months and believe they are an appropriate fit for this role.
We voted 33.33% for Nethermind, Trail of Bits, and OpenZeppelin: We believe these three security member electors are the best fit due to their great work in the past.
We voted Set L1 surplus fee and L2 min, Set only L1 surplus fee, Set only L2 minimum base fee, Set neither option and cancel: We think this ordering of this fee oversight correction is most appropriate.
We voted For: Although we now have a larger grants program, we think running this rather smaller program is still worth it. This will encourage and cause all the programs to be diligent and hold each other responsible while also creating alternative grant sources for teams looking to build.
We voted For: We are fully in support of implementing this proposal for a front-end interface to facilitate the inclusion of transactions on L1 during Arbitrum Sequencer downtime. This lets users maintain transaction activity even in the absence of the Sequencer, aligning with the core principles of decentralization and user autonomy. The technical expertise and proven track record of WakeUp Labs also adds credibility here.
We voted AGAINST: Following similar reasoning with our snapshot vote. Frankly, we were leaning towards abstaining here as we think at the end of the day, this proposal is great and should receive some funding, but just done through alternative grant programs that are currently set up to encompass stuff like this.
We voted Game Over (Against): We enjoy the concept and think the concept as a whole should be something that is explored deeper. However, the ask is just very unreasonably high in our eyes and almost immediately disqualifies it for further discussion. We think the same proposal with options to choose the amount or a (much) smaller budget would be more appropriate and something we would definitely support.
We voted For: In line with our past vote reasoning, we are excited to see this finalize and officially start. This should be a good example for DAOs across the space and should hopefully spur more DAOs to do such.
We voted For: We have seen Tally help Arbitrum customize the voting portal and have been very responsive to any bugs or requests we have made. This is a great team to continue the working relationship with and the budget ask is very reasonable.
We voted For: We are in favor of this bridge funding for STIP. These programs have shown a consistent and reliable distribution for the Arbitrum project and are relatively reasonable in the grand picture of everything that is happening right now.
We voted Certora: We are putting our full voting weight behind Certora. First, with our limited votes, we thought a proven security provider would be the best fit for the council. Looking at all of the security providers, we’ve worked with and have been how good the team at Certora is first hand and believe they would be great fits for this council.
We voted For: In line with our first snapshot approval, these members have shown significant dedication to the DAO and should be compensated accordingly.
We voted For: This writeup is very in depth and for a program that is substantially smaller than some proposals that we have seen be voted in, we are rather confident in the per dollar value add of this program. Like our snapshot vote, we are still in favor of the on chain vote.
We voted For: We are voting with the council reviewers’ decisions. Therefore, all of these proposals that they have recommended to be passed we are also voting yes on.
We voted For: We’ve chatted with the Event Horizon team on multiple occasions and are very content with the final output of this proposal. This is an appropriate amount and should be a good experiment to see their product play out at a larger scale. Thanks to the team for their hard work these last few months and constant feedback/responsiveness! Looking forward to seeing their delegate platform more and more.
We voted 100% 1 Cohort of 8 Weeks: This fund as a whole is an interesting idea for us. We think it’s certainly worth exploring, but before diving all in, a smaller test cohort (single) seems most appropriate.
We voted Fund with 1m ARB each: For an amount that is relatively trivial to the DAO, this is an appropriate amount for the type and quality of work that these two teams are doing. It’s imperative we support these teams across DeFi and should hopefully set a good precedence across other DAOs.
We voted For: We are voting for all of these extra requests. If the budget permits, this batch is adequate and we think should be awarded the grant as well.
We voted For: GovHack in Denver was a great experience and members from our team attended. We think this is a great initiative for the price and was a very productive experience. Overall, we are super happy to see these events happen again.
We voted For: We understand that this grant is not a part of the LTIPP program, but believe this is a value add to the Arbitrum ecosystem as a whole. Overall, we are a fan of the grant match by Michael the founder and think this is appropriate.