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.
1 Like
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.
1 Like
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
1 Like
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.
1 Like
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.
1 Like
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.
1 Like
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.
1 Like
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.
1 Like
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.
1 Like
Snapshot Votes: January 2025
Non-Constitutional: Stable Treasury Endowment Program 2.0
Voted For: I like this program and its meaning for the DAO. I would, however, love to see some more detailed reports coming out of this. Posting a short report every month or every three months is expected. Some great feedback can be seen in the comments about diversifying outside T-bills. I would love to see that as well so the funds are more diversified across RWA. Otherwise, I am excited to see version 2.0 in action. I support the program.
The Watchdog: Arbitrum DAO’s Grant Misuse Bounty Program
Voted For: When I first heard about this proposal, I was excited about it. This kind of program has a good record with other projects/companies in Web2, so I believe this will transition well in our space. I also appreciate the updates and extra clarification that Entropy Advisors provided to my comment regarding reports being public. It has now been changed so that the committee will decide which cases will be made public and which will not. I also appreciate that the program will have a trial period of 6 months, after which the report will be presented to the DAO. I am excited to see how many of these cases the program will cover and how much funds can be recovered for the DAO. The best-case scenario here is that the amount recovered by the watchdog would exceed the program’s budget of 400k ARB.
Thank you to all the candidates for their applications. It was amazing to see how many amazing candidates showed interest in working on this project. Below you can find my pick for the domains allocator and a short explanation.
Arbitrum D.A.O. Season 3 Elections
Gaming
Voted: Flook
Great balance between Flook and Nikki gives a good team that could work well for this domain. It was seen in the past version of the program. Since their goal is to attract web2 studios to build web3 games, their reach is very valuable. They both have good reach on their Twitter channel and Nikki on streaming platforms.
Dev Tooling on One and Stylus
Voted: Andreiv
All candidates were very interesting here. After watching the recording, I decided to vote for Andreiv. His past experience as a developer showed he understands the problems developers face and what are the missing pieces to really propel the ecosystem. Also, I believe that he will bring his direct and no-bullshit mentality and could help build great tools for developers.
Education, Community Growth, and Events
Voted: SEEDGov
After reviewing the applicant, I decided to vote for SEEDGov, the existing domain allocator. Their experiences and connections in these industries with organizing events, building communities, etc., would really benefit them to run this domain successfully.
New Protocols and Ideas
Voted: Gabriel
Since these domains address new projects, I decided to vote for a new candidate, Gabriel. His past experience in crypto gives him a wide knowledge in the field. Also, his key areas of vision for the domains are the right mix of fresh ideas in crypto. I think his role in this field will attract a lot of new exciting projects to build on Arbitrum.
Proposal for Piloting Enhancements and Strengthening the Sustainability of ArbitrumHub in the Year Ahead
Voted Against: I really like the ArbitrumHub website, and I think you did a great job collecting so much information in one place and organizing it so it is easy to find, especially for new people joining the DAO or builders looking for a grant.
My main issue is the budget ($230k+) and the justification for it. I went to check out Analytics. Having roughly 1k views per month and around 500 sessions on average in 2024 is a clear stat that the website is a nice thing to have, not a necessity for the DAO. It’s just not crucial, and this is why I think the budget doesn’t justify it.
I would hope you guys keep on building. There are incentives like Questbook grants or maybe even outside funding like Gitcoin or Giveth grants available where you might participate. I really hope you guys find a way to fund yourselves and continue building.
Arbitrum Strategic Objective Setting (SOS) – Defining the DAO’s Interim Goals
Voted For: I think this is a great example of why we voted in a firm like Entropy to the ArbitrumDAO. To have a team to tackle issues like this. I believe having frameworks like this will help in making our DAO more transparent, easy to understand, and well-driven since the processes are well defined. Many times we hear feedback that DAOs are very complicated and hard to understand for new people to join. I believe this proposal is a step in the right direction to tackle these issues.
1 Like
Tally Votes: January 2025
[Constitutional AIP] Activate Arbitrum BoLD + Infura Nova Validator Whitelist
Voted For: Overall, I am super happy with the BoLD upgrade. This upgrade will help the Arbitrum chain reach a higher-level Fraud Proof mechanism. This move will help Arbitrum stay in the lead on the list of rollups on the l2beat site. Leading by example here. I support the proposal. Also, I believe we should whitelist Infuras Nova Validator. Infura has been participating with Arbitrum for a long time and I see no reason to not whitelist them.
1 Like
FEBRUARY 2025
Snapshot 
:
Approve the Nova Fee Sweep Action
Voted For: The proposal makes sense and is very straightforward. I agree with some other comments that ETH collected (1885 ETH) could be used in staking protocols and give yield to the DAO. Something to discuss in a proposal. Also combining both votes on Tally for Timeboost and Fees Sweep makes sense since both are getting support from DAO.
Request to Increase the Stylus Sprint Committee’s Budget
Voted For: My suggestion was to re-open the application window in case the proposal passes and the budget increases. After getting the feedback from Jojo that a budget increase is already set for specific projects, I agree that there is no need to re-open the application. Also, I learned that projects could update their application and budget in Questbook anytime (like Moving Stylus did). Seeing this dynamic is enough for me to vote For this proposal. It is great to see that this sprint gained such great traction. Love to see a successful proposal like this.
Arbitrum Growth Circles Event Proposal
Voted Against: As my initial feedback, I still think this proposal is a “nice-to-have.” I do support the idea of trying and experimenting with different approaches, but this idea seems quite basic and not innovative enough. Virtual workshops are known to be a lot less effective, and spending a budget of $67K seems quite excessive.
If this proposal moves to Tally, I would love to see a clear indicator from the community (builders) that they are interested in this type of event (maybe an interest list or pre-application form?). Also, I would love to see more detailed KPIs (how will we know if this proposal is successful or not?) and a more detailed budget breakdown.
[CONSTITUTIONAL] AIP: ArbOS Version 40 Callisto
Voted For: This upgrade is necessary to follow the Ethereum roadmap and also aligns Arbitrum with all EIPs. The Callisto upgrade will bring better functionality and developer experiences. I have full trust in the development team to execute on this upgrade. This is why I support the proposal.
Arbitrum Audit Program
Voted For: Controversy about this proposal comes from how this was handled and not the content of the proposal itself. From my understanding, the audit program at the moment doesn’t exist, which is a bad thing. For many new projects (especially DeFi), audits are a crucial and most expensive task to do before launch. To be a welcoming chain, it would be awesome to help high-end projects with this. This is the reason I voted and support this proposal.
I do believe there is some room for improvement based on my feedback, like how we can make sure to get fair pricing. I suggested the “Sealed bid” method or any other to make sure we use all mechanisms to get a fair price. Also, I would love to see a push for collecting bids (offers) in ARB tokens, not in USD, so we would lower the ARB selling pressure.
Tally🗳️:
OpCo: A DAO-adjacent Entity for Strategy Execution
Voted Against: It took me quite some time to wrap my thoughts around this proposal. In general, I fully agree to set up an entity that would execute for the DAO. I am sure this would result in much more efficient operations. But based on how the proposal is structured, I decided to vote against it. I don’t like that the OpCo proposal is set for such a long period (2+ years).
Since it’s that long, the budget is also significant (30M ARB). The proposal already plans to hire 12 full-time employees (besides OAT members) from the start. This kind of approach reminds me of government-funded agencies or something. A big concern for me is also about the “off switch.” In case things don’t turn out as we expect, will we really terminate this? Will we fire people that we worked alongside for the last 2 years? This could become a mess for all of us.
The argument here is that with a big treasury, we need to make big moves. I disagree. We do have a big treasury, but the DAO space is still very early and inexperienced. We need to experiment, and we do that by staying lean and agile. I support the idea of OpCo, but not at this size.
Non-Constitutional: Stable Treasury Endowment Program 2.0
Voted For: After reviewing the reports, there is no reason not to further support this STEP program. Diversification of the funds in a DAO of our size is important and RWA is the best way to do it in this case. Also, I believe in the team that the execution of the 2.0 program will be done well. I do expect consistent reporting on the program during our monthly GRC calls.
Arbitrum D.A.O. (Domain Allocator Offerings) Grant Program - Season 3
Voted For: Since Arbitrum DAO launched, there have been so many grant programs for different stages and levels of builders, run by different teams. So much experimentation was already done. This was a great way to see what works and what does not so much. Today, we can see that Arbitrum D.A.O. is a program that brings good results, it’s simple for builders to understand, and most of all, it has an awesome team like Jojo and other domain allocators as part of the program.
At the moment, there are a lot of builders waiting for this program to pass so they can apply and hope to receive a grant. We even publicly instructed many projects here on the forum to wait with their proposals for this program to pass and apply there. This really shows how much burden this program carries for the DAO. This is why I decided to support this proposal.
1 Like
MARCH 2025
Snapshot 
:
TMC Recommendation
Voted (#3, #1, #2, #4, Abstain): I reviewed the proposal and decided to vote as suggested by TMC (#3 Only Deploy Stable Strategy).
- However, I do think this kind of vote should be split into two different votes. It is very confusing and could result in missed voting intentionally.
- Since this topic was not listed under Proposals, it got way less attention before this was pushed to the vote. I hope the feedback collected during the snapshot phase will be regarded once this hits the Tally vote.
- I also agree with the opinion that this methodology (ranked voting) was not appropriate for this kind of vote. It should be strictly For, Against, or Abstain choices. Current ranked voting may lead to wrongly interpreted results.
Proposal: For Arbitrum DAO to register the Sky Custom Gateway contracts in the Router
Voted For: Sky/Maker has a great reputation in crypto, especially among users who have been in this space for some time. This is why it is great to see the integration of the Arbitrum chain (besides Ethereum, Base, and Gnosis). Our reputation with a combination of Sky and Spark can bring a lot more uses to Arbitrum.
I believe that the necessary upgrade in this proposal to update the router is a small effort to really increase users’ experience when onboarding sUSD and USDS. There is no cost related to this proposal, only work from both the Sky and Arbitrum teams. Both teams have already confirmed they are willing to work together to implement this.
GMC’s Preferred Allocations (7,500 ETH)
Voted For, Deploy capital: At first glance, the idea to spread funds between only four projects seemed kind of not well thought out. Lido, Aave, and Fluid seem like the most logical choices. I did agree with the opinion shared by many that we need to include more Arbitrum-native projects. This is why I love to see Camelot being added to this list.
Overall, the choices GMC made seemed logical. The right balance of trusted providers with good security. I do look forward to seeing the results staking will bring to the DAO.
Tally🗳️:
Request to Increase the Stylus Sprint Committee’s Budget
Voted For: I agree with increasing the budget to fund additional projects. The Stylus Sprint program is an important piece of our ecosystem. We can see a real show of strength by having so many projects apply to this program (147). It makes sense to support as many as we can because this will allow us to grow the developer base for future development on Arbitrum and our Orbit chains.
[CONSTITUTIONAL] - Adopt Timeboost + Nova Fee Sweep
Voted For on Tally proposal for the same reasons as explained in my Snapshot comment.
[NON-CONSTITUTIONAL] Arbitrum Onboarding V2: A Governance Bootcamp
Voted For: I do share some concerns from fellow candidates that voted against this proposal, but I do still think that opportunity costs are much higher to not do it. I see this program as a way to bring 20 highly invested, talented people to Arbitrum DAO.
From that 20 people, we might see some take up even more active roles in our DAO, like working on individual proposals, helping define strategy, or even offering services. There will always be more important stuff to focus on in the DAO than to bring new people to governance, but we must find a way to get a new flow of people in the DAO. And this bootcamp seemed like a good way to do it. I support the idea.
1 Like
APRIL 2025
Snapshot :
/
Tally🗳️:
[NON-CONSTITUTIONAL] Arbitrum Audit Program
Voted For: For the same reason as my comment on the Snapshot vote.
Its also great to see my suggestion to push for payment in ARB to auditors in the Tally proposal.
Additionally, we will seek when possible to offer the payment in ARB as opposed to USD, subject to the auditor’s needs.