This is Tekr0x.eth’s delegate communication thread.
I will continue to update.
- Twitter Profile: Tekr0x.eth
- Warpcast Profile: Tekr0x.eth
- Snapshot Profile: Snapshot
- Tally profile: Tally Profile
- Karma: Karma Delegate Profile
Tally Votes: August 2024
[Constitutional] ArbOS 31 “Bianca” (Stylus, RIP-7212 Support, Nova Fee Router)
Voted FOR: I like support for smart contracts (Rust and C++), the new precompile that reduces verification costs by 99%, and the streamlined fee collection process, will greatly boost scalability, security, and governance. I’m excited about these improvements. Overall, I believe these changes have strong support, and I’m eager to see them implemented.
Arbitrum Multi-sig Support Service (MSS)
Voted FOR: This proposal will reduce costs and increase efficiencies within the DAO. This change should clearly enhance operational efficiency across various initiatives.
Entropy Advisors: Exclusively Working With Arbitrum DAO
Voted FOR: After meeting with the team and thoroughly reviewing the proposal, I am confident that having a dedicated team like Entropy Advisors working full-time on the Arbitrum DAO will yield significant benefits for the future. I fully support both the team and their proposed budget.
Funds to bootstrap the first BoLD validator
Voted FOR: After reviewing the proposal and comments I believe a BoLD validator in terms of security and long-term goals for the Arbitrum network is necessary. I also like the collaboration between Arbitrum DAO on Arbitrum Foundation on this matter.
ARB Staking: Unlock ARB Utility and Align Governance
Voted FOR: I see this proposal as very innovative in the field of governance tokens. Utility of governance tokens is something that all DAOs face and as Arbitrum DAO we need to experiment with different approaches on this. I am excited to see how this proposal will reflect on the market price, open new possibles with stARB, and how will effect governance/delegation.
Snapshot Votes: August 2024
[Non-constitutional] Incentives Detox Proposal
Voted FOR: There have been a lot of initiatives running at the same time. Many of them collided with each other. I think it important to analyze the past activities before moving to next ones.
ARB Staking: Unlock ARB Utility and Align Governance
Voted FOR: After reviewing the comments, I’ve decided to support the proposal. The Tally team appears to be a strong fit for this initiative, and I look forward to seeing it move to a vote on Tally.
Transparency and Standardized Metrics for Orbit Chains
Voted FOR: Implementing standardized metrics is essential, and the GrowThePie team is fully equipped to execute this successfully. I support this proposal.
ArbitrumDAO Governance Analytics Dashboard
Voted FOR: The proposal and budget appear reasonable given the size of the DAO. The Curia team seems well-qualified for the task, and I look forward to seeing it implemented.
ArbitrumDAO Off-site
Voted FOR: This should be an IRL event. I suggest doing it during some bigger events, like Devcon which will take place in Bangkok in November.
Proposal to Temporary Extend Delegate Incentive System
Voted FOR: Since joining the Delegate Incentive System, I’ve put much more effort into my role as a delegate, with a more structured approach to casting my votes on Snapshot and Tally. The program is well-designed, encouraging even smaller delegates like myself to become deeply involved in decision-making.I believe this program should be extended and developed into a long-term initiative.
Should the DAO Default to using Shielded Voting for Snapshot Votes?
Voted For on all Snapshot votes: That’s an excellent proposal. I believe this approach will encourage delegates to be more engaged in the decision-making process. It will require us to review the forum, read through the comments, and consider the perspectives of fellow delegates before making our own informed decisions.
An (EIP-4824 powered) daoURI for the Arbitrum DAO
Voted Against: The proposal did not follow the standardized process, which is why I decided against it. However, I am open to reviewing it again if it follows the usual procedures.
Strategic Treasury Management on Arbitrum
Voted Against: I believe treasury management should not be managed by smaller groups/teams but should be a collective mission.
Should the DAO Create COI & Self Voting Policies?
Voted FOR Strict Self-Voting Policy: The best policy is a Strict Self-Voting policy because it means delegates with bigger power can’t decide or swing votes for their benefit.
Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship
I voted FOR Unicorn Partners as the first option, and Panda Partners as a second option: Due to the size of the initiative and the Ethereum Foundation being behind it, I believe we must support and sponsor this event. Compared to the other spending we have at Arbitrum DAO I believe spending 75 ETH as Unicorn Partners is not an expense too big for the DAO. I agree with Griff’s proposal that the sponsorship could be paid in ARB.
Snapshot Votes: September 2024
[Constitutional] Extend Delay on L2Time Lock
Voted FOR: Giving the process 5 extra days seems a small price to pay for how much extra safety we gain in response to bad actors. It is also great that the delay is only for constitutional votes, and not all future proposals.
STIP-Bridge Operational Budget
Voted FOR: Because the proposal and its budget already been approved I support this proposal without and comments. The team working on it did their job well and I feel they need to be compensated fairly.
[Replace Oversight Committee with MSS] Delegate to Voter Enfranchisement Pool — Event Horizon
Voted FOR: Getting more people involved in DAO has always been a goal of mine and this proposal is set to doing exactly that.
ArbitrumDAO Procurement Committee Phase II
Voted For - Extend: Having a committee to oversee and manage external providers that we can trust is necessary. The team behind it seems very capable and trustworthy. The budget seems fair based on the scale and size of the proposal.
[Pyth Network] Arbitrum LTIPP Extension Request
Voted Against: We need a clean slate with our current grant extension for the DAO. Extending Pyth network requests could result in unnecessary amplification. To be clear. My decision has nothing to do with Pyth Network and how they did their job with the program. My vote is only operational so we stick to initial deadlines and comply with the Detox Proposal about the new structure for future grants in the DAO.
Enhancing Multichain Governance: Upgrading RARI Governance Token on Arbitrum
Voted For: Happy to see RARI DAO moving their governance on Arbitrum. This could be a great case study for us for all future protocols or DAOs that decide the same.
Synthetix LTIP Grant Extension Request
Voted Against: For the same reason as another proposal to extend grants. My vote is only operational so we stick to initial deadlines and comply with the Detox Proposal about the new structure for future grants in the DAO.
Fund the Stylus Sprint
Voting For: I feel that the proposal size is quite big (5M+ ARB) for the structure the Entropy team set up. Many other initiatives with significantly less funding have a better structure, in my opinion. However, due to the novelty of Stylus and my full trust in the Entropy team, I support this proposal. I look forward to the analytics and results after the proposal ends. For the next iteration of the program, I would like to see a more detailed structure.
[Aave DAO] LTIPP Grant Extension Request
Voted Against: For the same reason as another proposal to extend grants (Synthetix, Pyth Network) My vote is only operational so we stick to initial deadlines and comply with the Detox Proposal about the new structure for future grants in the DAO.
Terms of Tenure for STEP program manager
Voted #1 Additional funds for one year (then other options):
When we were voting on the original proposal, I was in favor. While I think this was an operational mistake by the team, we should avoid this mistake in the future. I still believe the STEP program works very well, and the team behind it should be compensated fairly. The solution to add funds for one year sounds like the best way to fix this. However, we should use this example to learn from and avoid repeating this mistake in the future.
ArbitrumDAO Off-site
Voted for Online event (then other options): Overall, I was very excited when I first heard about the new IRL offsite for the Arbitrum DAO. I think this type of event is super useful for both the existing gov team and introducing new members to Arbitrum DAO. My only concern (as expressed in the comments) was that the event would compete with the GovHack event by HackHumanty at the same time. I will vote for the Online event. I still support the IRL event by Danielo and the team. I would love to see what a new format of IRL events would look like. I am excited to see what will be next from them.
GovHack Devcon in Bangkok - Hack Humanity
Voted For: I am a strong supporter of the GovHack project. I see huge benefits in hosting this kind of event, both for active delegates and for new ones to get more involved in the operations of Arbitrum DAO. Hosting GovHack as a side event during Devcon fits well for most of us. Also, I love to see that the budget for this one is much lower than it was in Brussels.
[Non-Constitutional] Funds to Bolster Foundation’s Strategic Partnerships Budget
Voted For: I still lack more transparency on how these funds are used. Who gets, how much? I understand some of these deals should be private. But it is hard for us to asses if this kind of fund justifies the outcome if we don’t know how the funds are used. On the other side, I trust Arbitrum Foundation that in this time of highly competitive conditions we will use the funds in a positive way that will benefit Arbitrum and Ethereum ecosystem. Also now that Stylus is out we need to get even more aggressive in getting new L3 chains built on top of Arbitrum. I decided to support the proposal either way.
[Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum DAO Delegate Incentive Program
Voted FOR - DIP V1.5: Incentive programs showed that with programs like this, you can get very active and engaging governance in your DAO. As a DAO you want the best kind of people making decisions, giving feedback on proposals, attending weekly calls, etc. It takes a lot of time to be active in the governance so incentives like this help bring smart, experienced, and talented people to your DAO. I fully support the DIP 1.5 program run by Seed Latam
Tally Votes: September 2024
Delegate to Voter Enfranchisement Pool — Event Horizon
Voted For: The proposal seems like a step in the right direction. The goal of our DAO (or any DAO) should be to get as many active people involved in delegation and governance as possible. Many times, we see similar profiles of people being more involved in this type of governance. Maybe this proposal could bring in more diverse-minded people. I believe we would all benefit from it in the long term. I am excited about this program and look forward to the results/report after some months in action.
Snapshot Votes: October 2024
[Non-Constitutional] Whitelist Infura Nova Validator
Voted For: The proposal seems solid and straightforward. When researching Infura company I found out they have a very positive reputation. I see no reason not to support this proposal.
Research on context and retention
Voted For: In terms of security, I think requesting read access is fine as long as the tools are security tested. Insights into our communication channels can bring some interesting info and show how we can improve. Supporting this proposal is a small effort from the DAO and foundation side, with big benefits once the analysis is done.
An EIP-4824 powered daoURI for Arbitrum DAO
Voted For - Use ENS TXT records: Picking up good practices from other DAOs makes sense. Putting as much info as possible on-chain is necessary for open and transparent governance. I support this kind of standard being adopted by all major DAOs. I agree that we should set the daoURI record on Arbitrum’s ENS. Also, it’s great that this upgrade doesn’t require any payment from the treasury.
LTIPP Retroactive Community Funding Selections
Voted Do not fund: In general I am very supportive of retroactive rewards. I think it’s the best way to compensate people or projects. But in this case, I don’t believe this is the right way. It’s hard for me to understand who deserves the reward. The project leader should plan and set up a system to hand out these rewards. Or set an internal committee to pick who gets it.
Establishing a DAO Events Budget for 2025
Voted For: Events are one of the most important channels for addressing our community. They also bring new users, projects, and developers to join Arbitrum. As leaders in the Ethereum ecosystem, we should have a very strong presence at as many events as possible. I understand that these things take time and require a lot of funds, but I think it’s worth it. Having a strategy and budget like this is a huge step in the right direction. It’s much better than the rest of our industry, where things are often decided ad hoc. Great proposal, and I support it.
(V2) Arbitrum Research & Development Collective
Voted for Funded with 2.09M (middle): I see no reason not to support this proposal. I think the work of ARDC has been valuable for the DAO and would like us to continue to support it. I also like the people involved in ARDC and would like to keep them working on the DAO. I picked the middle option because I believe that changes to some upfront payment is a big enough change. We will see how the term goes and then decide if we want to allocate even more funds upfront.
[Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum Token Swap Pilot Program
Voted For: Even though the sentiment toward this proposal is negative and the reasons seem valid, I still applaud this innovative proposal. The Token Swap program could be viewed as an experiment on how to connect and engage with ecosystem projects as a DAO. We can expect competition to become fierce with all the upcoming L2s and L3s, as well as competition outside the Ethereum world, so we as a DAO need to be innovative and experiment with different programs. Only this way will we maintain our leadership in this space.
GCP Council Re-Confirmation Vote for Tim Chang
Voted Reconfirm Tim Chang: Based on the information provided to me I decided to support and reconfirm Tim Chang to GCP Council.
GCP Council Re-Confirmation Vote for John Kennedy
Voted Reconfirm John Kennedy: Based on the information provided to me I decided to support and reconfirm Tim Chang to GCP Council.
Tally Votes: October 2024
UPDATED - Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship
Voted For: Being included in the big events in the Ethereum ecosystem is important. It might be hard to calculate ROI on this kind of event, but overall I think we all benefit from it. Not only Arbitrum but crypto space in general. For the future, I think we at Arbitrum DAO need to develop some other kind of system for proposals like this. We don’t need to spend our governance time on each sponsorship request coming in like this.
[NON-CONSTITUTIONAL] Arbitrum DAO Procurement Committee: Phase II Proposal
Voted For: After reviewing the proposal and feedback from fellow delegates I believe that Arbtirum DAO will benefit from this proposal being approved. Feedback regarding the election is a bit unclear to me, so I expect that the committee will be fully transparent about all future activities and will take our feedback into consideration. But I don’t think this is such a blocker that we need another rewrite of the proposal. I believe that the committee will take our feedback and improve without a new proposal.
Constitutional AIP - Extend Delay on L2Time Lock
Voted For: The proposal seems very straightforward. I voted For this proposal because this will increase security and bring Arbitrum chains closer to stage 2 rollups.
[Non-Constitutional] Funds to Bolster Foundation’s Strategic Partnerships Budget
Voted For: Same as my comment for the Snapshot vote. I still lack transparency regarding how these funds are used. Who gets, how much? I understand some of these deals should be private. But it is hard for us to asses if this kind of fund justifies the outcome if we don’t know how the funds are used. On the other side, I trust Arbitrum Foundation that in this time of highly competitive conditions we will use the funds positively that will benefit Arbitrum and Ethereum ecosystem.
ArbitrumDAO strategic “Off-site” (online) updated proposal
Voted For: I still think that we lack general and strategic discussion about the DAO. Many of us are present at multiple calls and meetings on a weekly basis but do we really take time a think about the big picture or think about general issues that we face in ArbitrumDAO? I don’t think so. An event like this could help us to that. Also, let’s not forget about new people joining the DAO. This type of project could be a good insight into the DAO and more general stuff. I think it’s worth trying it out.
Enhancing Multichain Governance: Upgrading RARI Governance Token on Arbitrum
Voted For: Same comment as for the Snapshot vote. Happy to see RARI DAO moving their governance on Arbitrum. I hope this case will convince other protocols or DAOs to decide the same and move their governance to Arbitrum.
[Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum DAO Delegate Incentive Program
Voted FOR: Incentive programs showed that you can get very active and engaging governance in your DAO with programs like this. As a DAO you want the best kind of people making decisions, giving feedback on proposals, attending weekly calls, etc. It takes a lot of time to be active in the governance so incentives like this help bring smart, experienced, and talented people to your DAO. I love to see that my suggestion was accepted. Now delegates will get bonus points (BP) if they attend Report Calls and Open Discussion proposals calls.
Fund the Stylus Sprint
Voted For: Onboarding builders is key to growing the Stylus and overall Arbitrum ecosystem. I think the program is designed well. Also, I believe that the fund (5M ARB) is enough to make a significant impact. I look forward to seeing the results of this program after some time. I would emphasize that the success of this pilot project will be defined by the quality of the projects/builders we onboard, so I wish good luck to all people involved in the projects. I believe they are a very strong team on the project.
Snapshot Votes: November 2024
Adopt a Delegate Code of Conduct & Formalize Operations
Voted For: As one of the biggest DAOs in the space, we need to lead by example for other DAOs. Having a Code of Conduct is a necessary step. This serves as a rulebook for situations that might arise, allowing us to refer to it as needed. In practice, it’s now up to us (delegates) to follow this code in real life.
[Non-Constitutional] Treasury Management v1.2
Voted Against: Overall, I was in favor of this proposal. We need a more defined strategy for our treasury, and I believe in Entropy as a great team to do that. However, for a few reasons, I decided to vote Against this proposal.
Before moving forward to Tally, I would love to see:
- A clear plan for how converting ARB to stables will be handled (e.g., OTC, etc.) to avoid impacting the ARB price.
- DAOs are a great way to decide on committee members. Let’s vote on them instead of simply appointing a group.
- A more concrete plan for KPIs. What key metrics will we follow, and how will these reports be presented to the DAO?
Restitution For Extensively Delayed ArbitrumDAO Minigrant Winners
Voted Against: It is unfortunate that this situation occurred, and I really feel for the builders. The biggest issue with this situation is not the price swing but keeping the builders in the dark for so long. We should do better with communication. However, paying out financial restitution is not the way to go here. We, as a DAO, cannot vote on such small cases. I think this is a waste of time. Overall, I believe this situation has hurt Arbitrum’s reputation. Let’s learn from it and move on.
Hackathon Continuation Program
Voted in favor, no on-chain mechanism: Timing in startups is important, and there hasn’t been a more perfect moment to build apps than now. I believe this program has some great startups (I checked them all) and would love to see them continue building on Arbitrum.
To be fair, at the moment, there are so many opportunities for builders out there, and there will be competition to attract the best ones. This proposal seems like a no-brainer to confirm and keep these startups in our ecosystem.
I agree that in the future, we should explore ways to get vested (like through our venture program, etc.) so we can see returns if startups are successful.
Also, the vote on the “on-chain vs. off-chain mechanism” is a bit confusing. I spent quite some time trying to understand the difference, and the terms here feel a bit misleading. I voted “no on-chain mechanism” to save the 30k budget. If this moves to Tally, please ensure these terms are clarified.
Tally Votes: November 2024
(V2) Arbitrum Research & Development Collective
Voted For: After being active in the DAO for almost a year, I have always seen work from ARDC as valuable. I also understand that this proposal, if approved, will secure another term with a great teams like L2Beat, Blockworks, and other to put efforts in to Arbitrum DAO. I have high expectations due to the size of the funds for this proposal (1.7M ARB). I expect a step up from V1 and to see even more effort put into it.
Establishing a DAO Events Budget for 2025
Voted For (same reason as Snapshot vote): Events are one of the most important channels for addressing our community. They also bring new users, projects, and developers to join Arbitrum. As leaders in the Ethereum ecosystem, we should have a very strong presence at as many events as possible. I understand that these things take time and require a lot of funds, but I think it’s worth it. Having a strategy and budget like this is a huge step in the right direction. It’s much better than the rest of our industry, where things are often decided ad hoc. I would add that having KPI reports after each event would be awesome. This way, we could have measurable results for each one. In the beginning, there might not be enough data to draw conclusions, but over time, we could shape KPIs based on which we can make decisions for future events.
Snapshot Votes: December 2024
[Non-consitutional] User Research: Why build on Arbitrum?
Voted For: Arbitrum + 2 others (SOL+OP) - This is a great initiative and a well-thought-out proposal. Builders are the main driving force of any ecosystem. While we are all building on Ethereum, there are key differences that builders need to consider when deciding where to build. Additionally, narratives change quickly in Web3, so conducting user research periodically is essential. I hope this first iteration of the program will serve as an excellent pilot for ongoing research. The results will help us shape better initiatives and programs for the future.
I would like to highlight to the team that it is crucial to gather input from a wide range of builders (from early-stage startups to late-stage ones) to gain a comprehensive understanding. I am also well-connected with some builders and can help you make connections, especially with ARB and OP builders.
Designing and operating the reporting and information function
Voted Abstain: During the governance call, it was mentioned that this proposal will be re-published. I voted to abstain. I look forward to seeing a new, improved version of this proposal.
Arbitrum D.A.O. Domain Allocator Offerings) Grant Program - Season 3
Voted to Renew with 5 domains (adding the Orbit domain): I believe this is the most comprehensive and direct grant program we have developed as a DAO. It is simple and straightforward for builders, while on the other hand, we have a very capable and complete team and DA working on it.
I decided to fully support the proposal, including the possibility of adding a 5th domain. I would like to point out to the team that as ambitions and the program grow, we expect the quality of the program to remain as high as it was in previous seasons. The responsibility has never been greater.
I expect all team members and the DA to bring their A-game and make this the best program for builders.
[NON-CONSTITUTIONAL] Arbitrum Onboarding V2: A Governance Bootcamp
Voted For: DAO governance is such a new industry, and experimentation is much needed. I agree with feedback from fellow delegates that we should take a more strategic approach with clear KPIs attached to this proposal. However, at this point, I would like to see this move forward to Tally. The proposal is not too expensive, and the experiment could bring us new ideas on how to tackle the lack of participation in governance. This is why I decided to support this proposal.
Unifying Arbitrum’s Mission, Vision, Purpose (MVP)
Voted For: Initiative to work on a more defined strategy for Arbitrum DAO is well needed. I like how the proposal is not rushing to find a solution directly but working in steps (one by one). Launching an MVP first before moving to SOS (Strategic Objective Setting) is a great way. Some feedback was that the direction and the process are a bit vague, but I think at this point, this is needed. Let’s first try to see the big picture before we decide to focus on specifics.
I do have an open question about the budget that Lampros Labs DAO seeks here. It’s mentioned that this will be addressed in the SOS proposal, but it would be great to understand the scope of the budget here and what will be included.
Partner with ETH Bucharest 2025
Voted For, with POAP: Excited to see this proposal and fingers crossed I am able to make it to the event next year. I met some of the team members behind ETH Bucharest in the past, and they are a super enthusiastic team that can deliver. The year 2025 will be super exciting for crypto, so it is important Arbitrum have a strong presence at this kind of event.
The budget seems OK, and I learned yesterday during the Open Discussion of Proposal(s) call that the budget will actually come from DAO Events Budget 2025. Also, I am a big fan of POAP, so I decided to go for this option as well.
OpCo – A DAO-adjacent Entity for Strategy Execution
Voted For: I think I haven’t spent more time on a proposal than on this one. When I first went through a proposal, my opinion was that we were voting on centralizing our DAO, that the budget was way too big, and that the duration was too long (30 months). There are so many ways that this can play out, and many of them can be harmful to Arbitrum DAO.
We opened so many questions and issues and they were addressed. Arbitrum Foundation’s post and fellow delegates raised some good points about why OpCo could become such a competitive advantage in the future that it might be worth trying it out. Great to see OAT serving as an off-switch here. I hope this is enough. We need more control as a DAO here.
I decided to vote For because I believe having a positive mindset in this space is better. We can do so much with a well-structured and managed OpCo here to make Arbitrum the leader in this space. Responsibility is super big, and I just hope Entropy can deliver.
Tally Votes: December 2024
Arbitrum Hackathon Builder Continuation Program
Voted For: For the same reason as my comment on the Snapshot vote. Timing here is important, and we need to keep up with the support of the selected startups.
Treasury Management V1.2
Voted For: For the Snapshot, I voted Against due to a lack of clear metrics, a preselected committee, and an impact on ARB price due to converting to stables. After attending a call with the team and feedback on the forum, I decided to vote For on the Tally vote. The biggest change of mind was that after reviewing the committee candidates and general trust in Entropy to execute. Having a clear strategy for our Treasury is the essence here and a step in the right direction. Happy to see we have a strong team to execute on it.