I completely agree with the Arbitrum Foundation’s decision to seek a vote from the ArbitrumDAO on banning Furucombo from all future programs. The evidence presented suggests a clear breach of trust and misuse of funds.
As a community, we need to take a strong stance against such actions to maintain the integrity of our ecosystem. I urge everyone to vote in favor of banning Furucombo and its affiliated members.
Furthermore, I believe it’s essential to take this matter to the next level. The Arbitrum Foundation should consider taking legal action against Furucombo, as it’s clear that they have breached the grant agreement. The Foundation should explore all available legal options to recover the misused funds and hold Furucombo accountable for their actions.
I would like to request that the Arbitrum Foundation provides a detailed update on the legal actions they plan to take against Furucombo. It’s crucial that we, as a community, send a strong message that such behavior will not be tolerated and that there will be consequences for those who breach the trust of our ecosystem.
Let’s work together to maintain the integrity of our community and ensure that those who misuse funds are held accountable
After consideration Treasure’s Arbitrum Representative Council (ARC) would like to share the following feedback on the proposal
We voted FOR the ban on Furucombo.
We believe the Foundation has worked dilligently to engage the Furucombo team and has had ample opportunity to address concerns raised.
This vote should send a clear signal to others wishing to work with the DAO that the terms of aggreements should be adhered to.
Is there (or can we make as part of this proposal) an easy to find list of projects that are banned for future voting?
I will be voting FOR the ban on Furucombo. It seems clear from the discussion that the Foundation has put in a reasonable effort to have the Furucombo team correct the issue and they chose not to do anything within a reasonable timeframe. Taking the response at face value, it is unfortunate that a miscommunication occurred due to the way the KYC was setup by the Furucombo team. However, there should be some onus on the entities receiving the funds to properly setup their communication channels to avoid this type of issue.
I’ll also add that even if we forgive it all as a communication issue, there have been other issues beyond a failure to return funds timely. Such as not really addressing ‘the why’ of why funds went to an exchange. As well as claims by users that the STIP was not ran according to initial intents.
As a larger DAO discussion, I would agree with a lot of the “Lessons Learned” section in the OP. And I think there are some going points made in terms of how to handle funding with future projects.
The following reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking, and ideation of the two.
We are voting FOR banning Furucombo from Arbitrum ecosystem.
While we appreciate that Furucombo did return the portion of the funds, it doesn’t change our perception that it was done way too late and that the previous handling of the funds (sending them to CEX) was suspicious. Furucombo did not do anything prior to the recent post from @Blazar to explain the situation and clarify it for the DAO.
Having said that, we feel that there should be some avenue of appeal available to Furucombo in the future to lift this ban and rebuild a constructive, healthy relationship with the DAO. We are open to discussing this with Furucombo if they are interested.
We vote FOR the proposal (banning Furucomobo from the future ArbitrumDAO programs) on Snapshot.
We acknowledge their public statement and return of the portion of the funds, but the lack of communication for the long time shouldn’t be ignored. This voting should also express how the DAO seriously consider the agreements established between the DAO and builders.
It’s sad to see something like this happening. I voted in favor of the proposal. I believe Furucombo should be banned.
Gm Arbinauts!
The results are in for the Furucombo's Misuse of Funds | Dhive proposal.
See how the community voted and view the detailed analytics on ⬡ Dhive.Io.
We hope the ban heavily discourages events like this from happening in the future. Funds were returned, but that was after all of the chat around this started. Main issue is lack of communication with DAO to clarify/explain what they were doing in a timely manner.
DAOplomats voted FOR - Ban Furucombo from the Arb
It was an easy vote in favor of banning them after going through the Foundation’s post. Misuse of funds is already a bad signal but Furucombo’s lack of initial cooperation to claw back funds after requests from the Foundation turned an already red flag into a big red banner.
We also support Olimpio’s comment regarding making public the protocols that misused funds in the first place. Definitely a bad signal regardless of the fact they returned the funds.
Where is the information re. ‘affiliated contributors’ though?
Who would even classify as an affiliated contributor?
Below are the opinions of the UADP:
We voted to ban Furucombo. If a project receives tens of thousands of dollars from the DAO, there is no reason for unsatisfactory comms and reporting. The STIP bridge itself was rejected due to Furucombo’s lack of reporting. The sheer amount of time it took for the team to respond to this request demonstrates a lack of decorum. Even if the team isn’t officially banned, they’ll struggle to attain funding from the DAO in the future due to reputation issues. Instituting an official ban should disincentivize other teams from committing similar infringements. We agree with other delegates that there should be a more clear means by which the AF/ DAO hold entities responsible.
Thank you for all the feedback received on this topic so far, and to all delegates who voted on the Snapshot to determine whether Furucombo should be banned from the ArbitrumDAO.
Since the DAO voted FOR this proposal, Furucombo, including all founders, current team members, and affiliated contributors, will now be banned* from all future ArbitrumDAO programs, including (non-exhaustive):
- Applying for future DAO-affiliated grant programs
- Qualifying for any retroactive programs from the DAO
- Affiliated members applying for open roles in the DAO
*As per this message, Furucombo’s founders (see list below) will be permanently banned, while current team members and affiliated contributors (see list below), will be banned for as long as they work for or contribute to Furucombo.
Founder(s)
As listed in Furucombo’s LTIPP application
Team Members
As listed in Furucombo’s link3
Multisig address and signers:
- 0x290BFbC2a7476156F318B331D6004868978A0854
- 0x395012DF0D443a7639E46Fcb0DAF756a9Bbf3c6c
- 0x48894207CA941206613A28006c436a9C1ad0426b
How will this ban will be effectuated?
- If any team members or affiliated contributors apply for an ArbitrumDAO-related program, while still contributing to Furucombo, the DAO will proactively reject any such application
- If the founder applies for an ArbitrumDAO-related program, the DAO will proactively reject any such application
In case the DAO did not proactively reject a grant application, the Foundation, as the steward of the ArbitrumDAO, reserves the right to flag it and reject the grant based on the Snapshot vote.
Possible repeal process
If Furucombo wishes to appeal the above proposal to lift this ban and build a constructive, healthy relationship with the ArbitrumDAO, it should make a proposal to the ArbitrumDAO on the Forum, and have a delegate with enough voting power raise the proposal as per ArbitrumDAO’s governance process.
List of Banned Projects and Stakeholders
The Arbitrum Foundation will maintain a list of projects and people banned from the DAO, starting with the aforementioned parties.
In addition, the Arbitrum Foundation will soon be sharing a list of all the protocols that returned excess and/or misused ARB from the STIP and Backfund STIP.
Hi there,
I’d just like to point out some alterations to the team members.
Blake and Zoe are no longer employees at Furucombo, and therefore should be removed from the ban list.
Additionally, my last day with Furucombo will be on August 15th, so I will also no longer be a team member of Furucombo.
Thanks,
Blazar
We examined the situation and were concerned about both what Furucombo intended to do with 59.5k ARB and their delay in returning the funds to the Arbitrum Foundation. Although the funds were eventually returned, the response was significantly delayed. Additionally, the lack of transparency and communication are significant concerns. As a result, we were saddened by this situation, and while we do not believe Furucombo had any malicious intent, we felt that banning them was the most appropriate option to ensure that no room is left for any oversight in such matters. Therefore, we, as ITU Blockchain, voted in favor of banning Furucombo from Arbitrum DAO to prevent similar issues in the future.
What if all these employees leave and make a new project? Will the ban apply to them?
Appreciate the process and mechanism on keeping tab of funds utilization.
Can’t speak for the foundation, but the understand is that if you were not one of the named founders, and you leave the project the ban doesn’t carry with them.
If there is a former employee who is being impacted and not getting through to the foundation, please do reach out happy to try to connect you. Hopeful that everyone at some point is welcomed back to Arbitrum.
Thank you, Arbitrum team, for following up on this issue.
I hope that Furucombo users can get their funds back. 