OCTOBER 2025
SNAPSHOT (OCTOBER 2025):
Snapshot proposal: [Constitutional] AIP: DVP Quorum
Voted: FOR
Reasoning:
From the get-go, I agreed with the proposal, but I had some concerns about the Apathetic Delegator Attack. In this type of attack, someone makes a large amount of ARB votable (for example, by delegating to themselves) but then chooses not to participate in governance. Since those delegated tokens now count toward quorum, if the attacker controls a big enough amount of ARB, they could make it harder for any new proposal to reach the required quorum.
I’ve been thinking about how to mitigate this, and I believe the solution lies in the social layer: encouraging large, non-malicious ARB holders to make their tokens votable and actively participate in governance, either directly or by delegating to an active delegate. So while the Apathetic Delegator Attack might cause some short-term disruption, it’s not a sustainable attack in the long run. Coming to this conclusion removed the last barrier for me to vote in favor of the proposal.
Snapshot proposal: AGV Council Compensation Calibration: Benchmark for Future Council Terms
Voted: FOR
Reasoning:
The raise does not seem to be egregiously high, nor does it apply to the current council members, which is why I decided to support this proposal.
Snapshot proposal: [Temperature Check] Should we try a Delegate Incentive Program like the Arbitrum Triple Dip?
Voted: AGAINST
Reasoning (link):
Hey Paulo, as you mentioned on yesterday’s call, the main question in your Snapshot vote is whether we want a predictable, algorithmic DIP.
Your proposal has more hard-coded rules, while DIP 2.0 is more flexible (meaning the PM or OpCo can adjust the rules as needed).
At ETH Warsaw, Mateusz from Arbitrum Foundation asked me the same question: do I prefer a predictable, hard-coded system or a flexible one? I told him I prefer flexibility, and I still feel the same way.
The main reason is that every system eventually gets gamed. That’s why we need flexibility, so that rules can be quickly adjusted when that happens. This naturally requires some level of centralization, in the form of a program manager.
And it’s not just about preventing the system from being gamed. If we notice that a rule (or set of rules) within the DIP isn’t working as intended, it should be possible to change it and try something else, without having to go through the governance vote each time.
That’s why I voted against your proposal on Snapshot. That said, I think your proposal includes some interesting ideas that could be incorporated into future iterations of DIP 2.0.
Snapshot proposal: The DAO Incentive Program (DIP 2.0)
Voted: FOR
Reasoning:
As mentioned, I prefer a flexible DIP program. On one hand flexible when it comes to adapting the rules if we see they are not having desired outcomes or even being gamed. On the other hand also the flexibility when it comes to contributors focus (via nudge seasons). Of course, there are some things that I think should be improved, but the good thing with this proposal is that they can be improved even after the proposal passes, because the PM and OpCo have the flexibility to do so. This is why I voted in favour of the proposal.
TALLY (OCTOBER 2025):
Security Council Member Election
In the Member Election phase I gave all my votes to Gustavo Grieco, mainly for having deep technical experience with the Arbitrum stack, but also for being willing to answer questions on the forum, like he did here.
Tally proposal: Transfer 8,500 ETH from the Treasury to ATMC’s ETH Treasury Strategies
Voted: FOR
Reasoning:
I kept my vote FOR that I made in the Snapshot vote. As I said then, I believe that putting this ETH to work and generating yield for the treasury outweighs the concerns raised by some delegates. If the strategy underperforms, we always have the option to clawback the funds.
GOVERNANCE CALLS (OCTOBER 2025):
I attended these calls:
- 1 October 2025: OpCo Operations - Status Quo & Q&A
- 8 October 2025: Arbitrum Reporting Governance Call (GRC)
- 14 October 2025: OpCo Operations - Office Hours
- 14 October 2025: Open Discussion of Proposals Governance Call
- 15 October 2025: The DAO Incentive Program (DIP 2.0): Open Discussion #1
- 17 October 2025: OpCo Monthly Update
- 21 October 2025: Arbitrum Triple Dip Open Discussion
- 23 October 2025: Mini Apps on Arbitrum
- 28 October 2025: OpCo Operations - Office Hours
- 28 October 2025: Open Discussion of Proposals Governance Call