Proposal: AIP-1.2 - Foundation and DAO Governance

AIP-1.2 - Foundation and DAO Governance



Category: Constitutional - Process

Submitted by: Lemma Ltd


This document (“AIP-1.2”) proposes amendments to the Constitution, and The Arbitrum Foundation Amended & Restated Memorandum & Articles of Association (the “A&R M&A”) and Bylaws (the “Bylaws”) to (1) remove references to AIP-1, and (2) make other changes reflecting feedback from the community.


AIP-1 set out critical aspects of governance and included key governance documents for the ArbitrumDAO, and The Arbitrum Foundation which referenced AIP-1 throughout: the ArbitrumDAO Constitution (the “Constitution”), the Bylaws and the A&R M&A. However, after vigorous community debate, AIP-1 did not pass.


The Constitution is a foundational document that lays out the governance system and capabilities of the ArbitrumDAO; the Bylaws and A&R M&A outline The Arbitrum Foundation’s relationship with and obligations to the ArbitrumDAO. These documents should be updated, via amendment, to remove references to AIP-1 and also to reflect other changes requested by the community during the debate process over AIP-1.


1. Amendments to the Constitution (link here)

  • Remove references to AIP-1, except as reference to the moment the original Constitution became effective.
  • Make explicit that proposals to amend The Arbitrum Foundation’s A&R M&A and Bylaws take the form of a Constitutional AIP.
  • Make explicit that the DAO may make a Non-Constitutional Funding AIP with respect to the Administrative Budget Wallet.
  • Lower the threshold number of Votable Tokens required for an AIP to be posted on-chain from 5,000,000 $ARB to 1,000,000 $ARB.
  • Add a new Section 5, which details the Data Availability Committee, including processes for removing and appointing Data Availability Committee members.

2. Amendments to the Bylaws (link here)

  • Remove references to AIP-1.
  • Clarify that the definition of “Administrative Budget Wallet” includes all assets that are contributed to or otherwise acquired by the Administrative Budget Wallet, inclusive of assets specifically approved by the ArbitrumDAO. As pointed out by the DAO in its feedback in response to AIP-1, the “Administrative Budget Wallet” defined term in the Bylaws was unclear and didn’t clearly reflect the reality of The Arbitrum Foundation’s receipt of 7.5% of the token supply upon the $ARB token genesis.
  • Remove references to “Special Grants” and replace with the concept of Arbitrum ecosystem growth.
  • Remove “AIP Threshold” defined term as it is not used elsewhere in the Bylaws
  • Clarify that the ArbitrumDAO may replace The Arbitrum Foundation’s directors, change the number of directors, and require The Arbitrum Foundation to take certain actions.

3. Amendments to the A&R M&A (link here)

  • Remove references to AIP-1.

Steps to Implement

  1. Approval of amended Constitution.
  2. Approval of Amended & Restated Bylaws.
  3. Approval of amendments to the A&R M&A.


This AIP-1.2 will be posted on the DAO forum and will have at least a 72-hour period for DAO comments and input. After the end of the 72-hour period and appropriate updates incorporating DAO feedback, this AIP-1.2 will be posted for vote on Snapshot for an additional 7 days. Subsequent to the Snapshot vote, an on-chain vote will be conducted according to the terms of the Constitution.


arbitum is very good i am very happy


Thank you for separating the concerns as the community asked. I’m looking forward to getting the community started. It was a tough start, but the work that has been done show the foundation is listening to the community.


The proposed amendments are satisfactory.


Here We Go $10 :heart_eyes: :kissing_heart: :kissing_heart:

1 Like

Looking good. Agree with change of team. Good Moving.


Appreciate the rework. Thank you for the clarity. I am waiting for snapshot .


Go ahead and keep in Roadmap

totally agree with this AIP


After this past week, I think we’ve all grown a lot and so has the Arbitrum DAO and seperate Arbitrum Foundation. I really don’t have much to add but this is the right direction going forward, I feel it. We’ll have money to grow the ecosystem, to support and spotlight important develops and members in this space and now we’ve got a lot of visibility thanks to the events of the past week… We’ve got a lot of important, influential people with eyes on ARB and the DAO and foundation now. We’ve got the transparency we asked for now and we’ve got a good idea from the September Cohort and March Cohort how the foundation will properly lift up the whole ecosystem together. I like these devs and I like this community. Let the crypto renaissance commence. :earth_africa: :heart_hands: :last_quarter_moon_with_face: :sun_with_face: :city_sunrise: :city_sunset:


So far the proposal looks good and I’m for the amendments of inposal and will be here while we touch 2-3-4-5-6-7 and So on$$$

1 Like

super go hao lui tor ???

About the Arbitrum ecosystem growth grants is something that the DAO will have vote on the amounts? Or is more related to partnerships with other teams to improve the space? Further from the name change is there a new definition of it somewhere or is the same that was discusses in AIP-1?

1 Like

good I hope this will great

I may have missed that, do you have a screengrab of the discussion? AIP1 had some important delegates comment that they should have the 5 million arb proposal requirement be reduced to 1 million ARB which Lemma and the Foundation replied back to and agreed that the 1 million arb be the requirement going forward. 500k would be too low I think for arb proposals. Lots of people could propose then and that could hamstring the DAO’s agility to get stuff done in the first couple months.

1 Like

To clarify for anyone not familiar with how the Snapshot to Tally flow works. Any proposal goes through this process:

  1. Post to the forum for discussion (Min 72 hrs)
  2. Post to Snapshot for offchain temp check - This vote is up for a week. Most votes which pass snapshot should pass on Tally. The threshold to post to Snapshot is very low because it doesn’t actually move funds onchain.
  3. Post to Tally for official on-chain vote. This essentially functions as a huge multisig with the number of signers being the number of delegates with over the minimum. This number being set at 1 million $ARB means just over 20 people would have this access. The reason we wanted this changed from 5 million $ARB is because then only 3-4 people would have the ability to post. This means that if the top 3 delegates didn’t like a proposal that was passed on snapshot, they could simply not post it to Tally. Another problem is simple bandwidth. Sometimes a vote passes, but none of the 3 top delegates have time to post it to Tally.

imho 1 million $ARB provides adequate decentralization for Tally posting.



1 Like

will there be a vote?

1 Like

I support it, when will the voting start?