Today in DeFi Research Delegate Platform
Key Information
Name: Today in DeFi Research
Delegate Address: 0xfA0142fEBf46e3F1E33a1c03922c365f882725Ca
Twitter: https://twitter.com/tid_research
Website: https://www.tidresearch.com/
About Us
Today in DeFi Research is a DeFi Research team focused on HNWIs, DAOs and institutions. We do farming research, governance, project analysis, sector analysis and other fundamental research to inform treasury, portfolio management, and governance decisions.
We are the research arm of Today in DeFi, a DeFi news media.
Our goals as Arbitrum Delegates
We aim to help Arbitrum DAO operate more effectively while retaining decentralized values. Our goals as delegates are:
- Decentralization - we think Arbitrum’s strongest value prop is its credible neutrality and decentralized values
- DAO efficiency - Decentralization often makes organizations slower, so we want to do our best to govern in a way that keeps Arbitrum DAO as efficient as possible.
- Effective use of funds - As ARB holders we are invested in the success of Arbitrum and want to govern in a way that uses ARB and its treasury as effectively as possible with minimal waste.
- Transparency - Large organizations often have issues with transparency. As a news organization we have the ability to track information well and hope to use that to help Arbitrum DAO.
Disclosure
We currently do not have any conflicts of interest, but will disclose them here as they arise.
Votes and Rationales
Request to Increase the Stylus Sprint Committee’s Budget
After careful consideration, we decide to vote ABSTAIN on Snapshot
- This proposal seems to be bypassing the initial specification of the Stylus Sprint. This could be warranted in extreme cases where the projects are very high value but as many of the projects are tooling and infra oriented, it’s hard for us to judge their value as we are not blockchain developers.
- The DeFi project on this list Ember seems quite high value from our view as DeFi analysts and traders, however it could also be funded through the Domain allocator program’s New protocols and Ideas track
Stylus is obviously a unique competitive advantage for Arbitrum and we do want to see it succeed but this proposal is very on the fence for us and we dont think we’d do it justice by trying to judge Blockchain tooling and infra projects without the ability to do so.
OpCo – A DAO-adjacent Entity for Strategy Execution
After careful consideration, we decide to vote AGAINST on Tally
- the reasons we cited before in our snapshot are still valid: cost, scope, lack of clarity, centralization.
- The original proposer Entropy has voted against this proposal, citing that they may be able to take on more of the roles Opco was intended for, and that AF is also getting more involved with Arbitrum DAO, reducing the need for an Opco.
- ARB Price is doing terribly, spending control is clearly needed.
Given these developments, and especially the fact that the original proposer of this - Entropy changed their position to be against this proposal, we are firmly still against this proposal.
We recognize the need for an Opco but it seems that role may be able to handled in a more streamlined way through the participation of Entropy and AF, and this proposal may not be the best way to handle it.
Non-Constitutional: Stable Treasury Endowment Program 2.0
After careful consideration, we decide to vote FOR on Tally
- Treasury Diversification: Reduces reliance on ARB token by diversifying into stable, liquid, and yield-generating RWAs.
- Ecosystem Growth: Encourages RWA adoption on Arbitrum, increasing platform utility and attracting quality projects.
- Direct Control & Transparency: DAO directly selects assets, avoiding management fees and ensuring transparency via reports and a live dashboard.
- Endowment Potential: Builds a sustainable revenue stream for DAO expenses, with $162,500 in yield already generated.
- Proven Framework from STEP 1: Builds on the success and infrastructure of the first program, making implementation more efficient.
- Refined Application Process: Improved RFP process ensures higher-quality investments and filters out unsuitable products.
However, we also believe that the following points of concern should be considered and dealt with when moving forward with the proposal
- Timing of STEP 2.0: Full results from STEP 1 are not yet available, making it harder to assess its success before launching the second program.
- ARB Liquidation Strategy: Unclear liquidation approach raises concerns about selling ARB at low prices. Some call for a more detailed plan.
- Program Manager Compensation: Uncertainty about whether increased responsibilities justify higher compensation, which may need a separate proposal.
- Governance Risks: Reducing ARB holdings could make governance attacks easier and more cost-effective.
- Lack of Data Justifying Treasury Allocation: Some members request more analysis on the long-term benefits of allocating 1% of the treasury annually.
- Parallel Fund Transfer: Funds are allocated before finalizing selections, raising concerns about community alignment with committee decisions.
AIP: Timeboost + Nova Fee Sweep
After careful consideration, we decide to vote for Nova Fee Swap proposal on Snapshot
- Recovering Idle Funds: The Nova Fee Sweep addresses the accumulation of 1,885 ETH in the L1TimelockAlias, ensuring that these funds are moved to the DAO treasury. The Nova Fee Router proposal has improved the efficiency and transparency of this process.
- Supporting DAO Operations: These funds will contribute to DAO operations, with all transfers being conducted through on-chain, auditable smart contracts, ensuring transparency.
Arbitrum Strategic Objective Setting (SOS) – Defining the DAO’s Interim Goals
After careful consideration, we decide to vote for on Snapshot.
- Fills a Governance Gap: The proposal addresses the DAO’s lack of clear, unified objectives, improving resource allocation and accountability.
- Structured, Transparent Process: A phased approach and OKR framework ensure inclusivity and clarity in defining objectives.
- Proactive Strategy: Moves the DAO towards proactive, strategic governance aligned with its long-term mission and vision.
- Flexibility and Accountability: Annual reviews and ad hoc adjustments allow adaptability, while clear objectives and key results enhance progress measurement.
- Encourages Participation: A transparent submission, feedback, and revision process fosters inclusivity and collaboration.
Points Worth Considering
- Timeline Duration: The three-month process may be too long for a fast-moving market; consider streamlining.
- Support for Contributors: Provide tools or templates to help less experienced contributors craft proposals.
- Centralization Risks: Distribute responsibility to mitigate over-reliance on Entropy Advisors.
- Clarity on Execution and Budget: Additional details on implementation and resource allocation are needed.
- Review Frequency: Evaluate if semi-annual reviews are necessary for agility without causing instability.
Voting NO on this proposal
Very on the fence here because its a good idea to have a resource which gathers useful info for:
-DAO delegates
-developers
-ARB Holders
-potential ambassadars
And also to introduce people to Arbitrum DAO in general,
The budget would be reasonable if it addressed those use cases specifically and actionably, however looking at the current MVP there’s signs that it may not do so:
-the website doesnt address key stakeholders clearly
-the order of buttons and stakeholders doesnt seem organized in a way that makes sense (for instnace ambassadars is one of the first items but delegates, users, developers, would arguably be higher priority stakeholders to target)
-there are several broken links for key items
-many of the most useful working links are to AF docs or AF resources
On the plus side, we like the proposal hub, grant hub, meetings page. These provide useful content and guidance which is complementary to the Arbitrum foundation page.
Once again this is not a bad idea - having a resource for arbitrum DAO, but the current lack of focus and lack of clarity in messaging makes it hard for us to vote for this proposal, especially as many of the more important functions like the developer hub are duplicated with AF or basically link to their resources.
Would suggest progressing the MVP more with a quest book Grant.
Non-Constitutional: Stable Treasury Endowment Program 2.0
Voted FOR this proposal
- Need for treasury diversification
- The proposal addresses the need to diversify the treasury into stable assets, especially considering the volatility of the ARB token.
- Diversification can potentially mitigate risks associated with fluctuations in the crypto market.1
- Ecosystem growth
- STEP 1 demonstrated a positive impact on the Arbitrum ecosystem, attracting RWA projects and contributing to TVL growth.
- Continuing this initiative could further solidify Arbitrum’s position in the RWA space.
- Competitive selection process
- The competitive RFP process ensures that the DAO selects high-quality RWA providers, promoting transparency and fairness in the allocation of funds.
AIP: BOLD - permissionless validation for Arbitrum
Voting FOR BOLD and whitelisting Infura Nova Validator
- Arbitrum should move towards further decentralizing its stack not just for “ethereum alignment” but to become more regulatorily resilient, reduce counterpary risk for users, and become the best, most trustless rollup in the Ethereum ecosystem, and we love to see it moving towards these goals
*Infura validator rationale from snapshot
Feedback
We would have greatly preferred to have these two separate proposals as separate votes on tally.
bundling them in this way makes it hard for us to check that there wasnt new additions or modifications to the proposal .
We are certainly for both proposals and would have easily voted For them if unbundled, but bundling made it more difficult to check that they were indeed simply the progression of the snapshot proposals without any major changes or interconnection between the two proposals.
If the issue is quorum, we actually think its easier for people to vote on proposals quickly and often in favor of them when they are unbundled as its easier to simply check its the same proposal and quickly vote for it (instead of having to spend additional time DDIng the proposal and perhaps losing that vote) so even for quorum purposes it seems non ideal
Unifying Arbitrum’s Mission, Vision, Purpose (MVP)
Voted FOR this proposal
Mission statements are a good idea to focus the DAO
Some feedback:
This proposal could be cut in 1/3 and still say the same thing. please cut down proposal length - use AI if necessary - as otherwise its a cost to everyone else’s time.
Partner with ETH Bucharest 2025 - Eastern Europe’s Leading Ethereum Conference and Hackathon
Voting FOR this proposal with POAP
While we prefered without POAP, the current vote is decidely in favor of POAP and we prefer to see this go ahead even with POAP rather than without
While 15k for POAP is a little high, it does provide good gamified visibility and showcase Arbitrum, so can make sense.
- ETH Bucharest is a prominent Ethereum event in Eastern Europe:
- Sponsoring the event would give Arbitrum significant brand visibility and exposure to a large audience of developers, investors, and enthusiasts.
- The proposal includes a variety of activities that would promote Arbitrum
- These activities include a speaking slot, a workshop, a hackathon, and a POAP activation.
- Showcases Arbitrum’s Layer 2 Innovation
- By sponsoring the ETH Bucharest POAP Passport and minting the POAPs on the Arbitrum Chain, it highlights the platform’s capabilities in a tangible way
- Drives Engagement and Gamification
- Attendees collect POAPs at various activities, creating a gamified experience that encourages participation and interaction
- Enhanced Brand Visibility
- Branding the POAPs with Arbitrum’s identity ensures continuous visibility throughout the event
- However, many of the proposed activities included in the sponsorship package, such as speaker dinner and VIP area, are deemed unnecessary by many of the community members. The proposal should explore options to remove the events and lower the budget.