[RFC] Proposal to Adjust the Voting Power of the Arbitrum Community Pool & Ratifying the Agentic Governance Pivot

Proposals Finalized AIPs
, ,
62

Quick update:

Following the successful Snapshot vote (with more than 3% of the votable supply participating), and with the option to reduce the voting power delegated to Event Horizon to 100,000 ARB being the most voted option, the MSS has initiated a transaction to return 6,900,000 ARB back to the DAO’s treasury.

1 Like
63

We’re voting in favor of reducing the delegation to 100K ARB.

While the original goal of empowering underrepresented contributors through the Voter Enfranchisement Pool was admirable, Event Horizon has since shifted its approach toward an AI-driven agentic governance model—one that was not officially endorsed by the DAO. This pivot, while possibly well-intentioned, diverges from the spirit of the original delegation and merits closer scrutiny.

Given the substantial 7 million ARB voting power currently held, we believe such influence should come with clear alignment and accountability. As ITU Blockchain, we find it reasonable to reassess whether Event Horizon has delivered on the commitments made in their prior proposal before further extending or maintaining their influence.

Reducing the delegation to 100K ARB is, in our view, a balanced path forward. It acknowledges the need for ongoing experimentation while ensuring that governance power remains proportionate, transparent, and reflective of the broader DAO’s direction. For these reasons, we support this adjustment.

64

I have voted OPTION B (B - Reduce delegation to 100K), given EH themselves are pushing for this, and they attempting to evolve to a AI centric solution. I think arguments to proceed are reasonable and a 100K maintained amount is not big enough to prevent the experiment from moving forward. Looking forward to see how this goes.

65

Voting FOR Option B — Reduce Delegation to 100 k ARB

Decision Summary
I voted in favor because the original 7 M ARB delegation was meant to broaden human voter participation, and the pivot to a large-scale agentic pilot hasn’t yet justified such an outsized vote share.

Voting Rationale

  1. Mandate Drift

    • The community approved 7 M ARB to broaden voter enfranchisement, not to fund a full-scale AI-driven governance experiment.
    • A material scope change warrants a fresh consent check.

  2. Underwhelming Results to Date

    • After several months, Event Horizon hasn’t shown wallet growth, proposal throughput, and delegate engagement proportional to a 7 M ARB block.
    • Keeping funds parked at that scale ties up capital without clear ROI.

  3. Expectation Mis-Alignment

    • We never set crisp objectives or KPIs at launch, making it hard to judge success or failure.
    • Resizing now gives room to reset expectations before scaling again.

  4. Scale the Pilot Down

    • 100 k ARB still puts Event Horizon in the top-100 delegates—enough to gather meaningful data without swinging close votes.
    • Maintains a live sandbox while capping downside.

  5. Accountability Precedent

    • Adjusting delegation when scopes change signals that transparency and renewed consent are baseline requirements.
    • Sets a healthy norm for future pilots.

  6. Support for AI Tools—Start Small

    • I’m bullish on AI agents, especially if they help smaller community members coordinate and fight voter disenfranchisement.
    • 100 k ARB is enough to prove value before asking for more.

Conclusion
Reducing the delegation to 100 k ARB realigns this experiment with its original spirit, clears space to define measurable success, and keeps the door open for innovative agentic governance—without distorting the DAO’s voting balance.