[RFC] Custom developments for the Arbitrum Snapshot

We, as a DAO, use snapshot constantly. While we have an awesome on-chain governance through tally, Snapshot really helps us in getting sentiment checks on a lot of proposals. The problem we have had, over time, is the limitation of options available to fit our needs. Let’s add a few examples.

  • elections of council/advisors in ltipp: users could select 5 members for council, 3 for advisors, some selected just one, some others all the available choices. While selecting only one is something that has a merit, selecting all translated in non legal votes
  • ratification of decisions of the council for LTIPP votes on single protocols: we were constraints in putting up 77 proposals, and delegates have to vote on 77 different snapshots. We could have had, instead, put up for example 5 proposals with 16 options, one for each protocol, saying “yes/no/abstain”, so that loading the proposals would have been faster, and voting on proposals, while requiring still time for scrutiny, would have been effectively faster.

These are the 2 main examples that came to my mind, involving

  • imposing a minimum/maximum amount of selections in a multi choices snapshot
  • create batch voting with no internal weights.

Idea is to discuss here if DAO feels the above is useful, throw in the forum some more potential ideas, contact snapshot, define a cost, write a formal proposal, and then vote and execute. One thing that also has to be discussed is how this would be effectively execute, it doesn’t make sense to create a new multisig for this, so maybe we could leverage infrastructure and committee we have now already.

Just to give some context: i have already taken contact with snapshot to understand if the above was possible, and the terms. We are talking accordingly to some initial findings about developments that should take a few weeks in the order of potentially 10-15k usd each. Please don’t take the numbers above as any hard promise on their side, nor anything. This is me just coming forward to have an estimate of the resources (time + capital) that we would need to move it forward on.

If the DAO also finds the above just too much of a burden for the relative low amount, we could likely pursue other roads like questbook to make it done. But again, I am interested in gathering some opinions on the value, after chatting with a few delegates that were positive on it.

You friendly arbitrum cow.


hey friendly cow, i’ve moved this thread to Grant Discussion as its still at the stage of forming a proposal :slight_smile:


I think a table upload for voting with dropdowns would be perfect for large scale initiatives like LTIPP

Or maybe

Project Name Sector Grant Size Strategy Goals & Objective KPI Orientation Distribution For Against Abstain Quorum % Vote Selection
Aave Lending 4 2 5 3 [Dropdown]
Uniswap Dex 3 4 1 5 [Dropdown]
MakerDAO Lending 5 3 2 4 [Dropdown]
Compound Lending 2 5 4 1 [Dropdown]
Yearn Yield 1 1 3 2 [Dropdown]

[Submit Button]

Could even put the rubric scores in there so all the relevant data could be there with the only user action being to select from the drop down.


I like the idea of custom development in Snapshot for Arbitrum.

I was also thinking along these lines that it is very much time consuming for delegates to create proposals individually for each protocol for such large scale programs like LTIPP.

I like the idea of batch voting it will have an impact on both the time consumption in creation of this proposals on Snapshot and secondly it will help delegates in voting.

This is also good. Could save time for delegates to open each proposal and then vote.


this is great but not sure how customizable is to make it in a way that we can effectively use it always.

But i see you in wanting to put the modality of choice alongside key info. Makes sense. I had a list of modal in my mind, and it would be prone to mistake if i had to scroll down to read whatever, go back up to click the modal, then down again etcetera. On the other hand this design is the most flexible.

I guess it might make sense to have “choice X, Y, Z”, and then have K amount of empty field that the snapshot poster can customize. We gonna have to start paying who posts on snapshot but it could make sense.