Proposal: Return 700M $ARB to the DAO Treasury

Proposals Finalized AIPs
,
54

About: AIP-1.05 - Return 700M $ARB to the DAO Treasury

Our vote is against.

To learn about the voting procedure of SEEDLatam and L2 en Español, you can read it here.

Rationale

We believe this proposal is unnecessary and seems more like a power play that could cause legal and reputational harm to the Arbitrum Foundation and, consequently, the DAO. It is worth clarifying that we voted against AIP-1 for the reasons we clarified in this forum. We consider it is time to move forward and not fall into situations that hinder growth since AI-1.1 and 1.2 address the main issues of AIP-1.

Details

Our main reasons to vote agains this proposal are the following:

  • The Foundation has unilaterally been allocated $750M tokens from the DAO that was not approved by the governance token holders.

    This is clarified in the Transparency report: Initial foundation setup and detailed in the AIP-1.1 in the Smart Contract Lockup and Operating Budget section.

  • Return 700M $ARB from the Foundation to the DAO as a symbolic gesture that the governance token holders hold ultimate power and authority over the resources that were granted to the DAO

    As we mentioned earlier, this is an unnecessary step and delays the launch of the Arbitrum Foundation. We believe that funding the Foundation is necessary for the growth of the Arbitrum ecosystem.

  • Buyback $ARB via Wintermute with whatever fiat is left from the $10M OTC sale

    This action entails unnecessary expenses, and we do not know the legal and regulatory scope of such actions. We must be cautious as the ecosystem is under the scrutiny of regulators.

  • Disclose terms of the market making deal with Wintermute

    We understand that there is a signed legal agreement; this could create unnecessary conflict between the parties. In addition, it would undermine the seriousness and reputation of the Arbitrum Foundation, which could affect future agreements with other entities/institutions or individuals.

Conclusion

Our community previously expressed its anger by voting against AIP-1. Now they consider that the Foundation has set things right with AIP-1.1, AIP-1.2, and the Transparency report: Initial foundation setup. This proposal does not contribute to the growth of the Arbitrum ecosystem, which is one of our pillars expressed in the Delegate Statement, but rather delays it.

About the other Proposals

3 Likes