I voted FOR everyone who met the following criteria in the MSS elections:
I voted for the following members:
Voting has completed for the MSS members. Thank you to all who took part and congratulations to the winners:
The KYC process with the foundation will now begin before this proposal moves to its final stage of Tally.
On behalf of the UADP, we have voted for three members that we thought were fit for the role and have been very involved in discussions following up and during the voting process. Three votes was such that each vote made a decent impact on the results.
We voted FOR the following 12 candidates. As an applicant ourselves, we decided to spread our votes equally and to candidates who have been valuable and active contributors to the DAO:
gm, voted for the following candidates. My selection was based on their performance and experience in the ArbitrumDAO and blockchain industry in general.
Savvy DAO voted for the following. We know it wasn’t 12 people but honestly there were too many good candidates!
See voting reasoning here: Savvy DAO - Delegate Communication Thread - #55 by SavvyDAO
Voted FOR as this is an easy way to increase efficiency and address holes in the current MS process per proposal.
The list of candidates I voted FOR were known figures that contributed to the DAO and are aligned with Arbitrum.
I voted for in hope that this will reduce costs overall over time.
But I still think that the payment made montly is way too high.
Because looking at the figures given in the first year there is no benefit in having the MSS.
I know these numbers can and will change but given that there are only 1-3 transactions a month paying basically 500$ per transaction if its 3, is a lot.
Yes these people are responsible for important tasks but for example I am in multiple Aave DAO multi-sigs regarding the Aave protocol embassy or Guardian and none of the signer is getting paid. Its a free service to the DAO.
Just voted FOR in the on chain tally proposal.
Will post my rationale later.
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’ll be voting FOR this proposal during the onchain vote.
We supported the proposal during the Snapshot vote, participated in the elections of the MSS members, and will also support it on-chain. We’d like to resurface that in addition to signers going through KYC, we would like to see the structure of a legal agreement that binds the signers to act in good faith and protects them from any liability that comes with executing a transaction.
That is not currently not addressed in the proposal, but we’re voting in good faith that Entropy will ensure that the aforementioned agreement is introduced.
I voted FOR this proposal on Tally, for the reasons outlined below
I’m voting FOR on Tally.
On the previous snapshot vote this was my rationale.
I’m happy feedback was incorporated into the final form of the proposal and happy to be one of the MSS members.
We vote FOR the proposal on Tally.
We maintain the rationale below on this proposal and continue to support the selected members to act as the guardians of the Arbitrum Multi-sig.
Voting “for” on Tally.
I have supported the MSS since inception and will continue to show my support by voting “For” on Tally. I think this will help reduce cost and increases efficiencies within the DAO moving forward.
I voted “FOR” because this proposal is a smart way to save the DAO a cool ~$315,000. Instead of throwing ARB at fragmented multi-sig signers, we’re getting a streamlined, pro team to handle it all, cutting down on costs and chaos. Plus, with the r3gen reporting, we’ll have a clear view of every ARB in and out, making it easier to track spending. It’s about efficiency, transparency, and keeping the DAO’s wallet happy.
The results are in for the # Arbitrum Multi-sig Support Service (MSS) onchain proposal.
See how the community voted and more Arbitrum stats:
DAOplomats voted FOR this proposal on Tally.
This was a good initiative we supported during the temp check so we showed our support during the onchain vote as well.
