Gm, gm 
The results are in for the [Pyth Network] Arbitrum LTIPP Extension Request off-chain proposal.
See how the community voted and more Arbitrum stats:
We vote AGAINST the proposal on Snapshot.
While the request itself seems totally valid and we expressed the support, we have resolved to respect the decision made with the Incentives Detox period (which hasn’t started yet but in effect soon) and we believe all the extension requests should be treated the same. We apologize for the wrong signal made before realizing the Detox is in effect for the extension.
First, we would like to thank @KemarTiti and his team for providing an update on their status here. The update was very detailed and informative, addressing many of the questions we had.
However, we align with other delegates in upholding our commitment to the Detox proposal and ensuring fairness to those who will no longer receive incentives.
With these considerations in mind, we voted “against” this proposal.
Hi everyone,
Although this extension was not approved, I want to sincerely thank all the delegates for the time and effort you invested in this proposal. I fully understand and respect the reasoning many of you shared.
Our commitment to advancing the Arbitrum DeFi ecosystem remains strong, and we look forward to increasing our active involvement in shaping the future initiatives of the Arbitrum DAO.
1 Like
I voted against this proposal in the context of the Incentives Detox that passed, and also since it’s stipulated that funds should be returned if unused in the original guidelines of LTIPP.
Below are the opinions of the UADP:
We voted abstain on this proposal because it presents an isolated case where Pyth alone would attain an extension. If extensions are to be given, this should be conducted in a collective and orderly manner, not in a one-off manner. The DAO also voted to pause incentives for a period of time to reflect and analyze the results and efficacy of previous programs. Introducing an extension detracts from that goal.
Vote: AGAINST
Type and Proposal Link: Snapshot –> Pyth Network Arbitrum LTIPP Extension Request
Voting Rationale Link: [Pyth Network] Arbitrum LTIPP Extension Request
=== COMMENTING ON PROPOSAL: ===
While we understand Pyth Network’s contributions and the reasons for this extension request, the approval of the Incentives Detox period makes it important to maintain consistency in how we handle incentive programs. Granting this extension would set a problematic precedent, leading other projects to assume extensions will be available in similar cases. Additionally, the original LTIPP guidelines stipulated that unused funds should be returned, and it’s vital that we stick to that framework to maintain fairness. We encourage the proposal authors to consider participating in future initiatives that take these concerns into account.