Terms of Tenure for STEP program manager
Vote: Additional funds for one year, 6 months from available funds, Liquidation of RWAs and STEP, New election at $86,581 per year, Abstain
Type: Snapshot
We voted for Additional funds for one year, 6 months from available funds, Liquidation of RWAs and STEP, New election at $86,581 per year, Abstain—in that order. Liabilities must be paid in correspondence with the dollar amount elected upon passing of proposals. There is no need to return to ground zero, so the continuation with Steakhouse is prudent.
GovHack Devcon in Bangkok - Hack Humanity
Vote: For
Type: Snapshot
We voted For both the snapshot and the onchain vote here. Generally, we’re more in favor of a long-term, structured approach, as opposed to one where events are planned and paid for ad hoc. However, due to the impending deadline for setting up the event for Devcon, we thought passing this proposal, as was done with Eth CC, was the right move. We are curious to hear further communications from Klaus and team regarding the decision to cancel this proposal.
[Non-Constitutional] Funds to Bolster Foundation’s Strategic Partnerships Budget
Vote: For
Type: Snapshot
With a degree of reluctance, we voted For this proposal. It’s often difficult to say No to such a large stakeholder since the work that they conduct is often critical. The AF plays an instrumental role in facilitating the effective continuation and development of the DAO and protocol. They have numerous existing relationships that cannot be easily outsourced and programs that require sustained funding. In that vein, we do think that the AF should have taken into account the large portion of ARB that is vested. Such budgeting would mean that a liquidity crunch for grants and partnerships would have led to better management and allocation of funds. However, due to NDAs and other variables that lead to a lack of full transparency, it’s hard to tell exactly why such budgeting decisions were made. A future plan should be implemented by the AF to reimburse the DAO at some point using the tokens that eventually vest, as opposed to continuing to grow their expenditure on grants. In other words, we are not seeing this as a growth program—but a temporary solution to liquidity issues.
[Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum DAO Delegate Incentive Program
Vote: FOR - DIP V1.5
Type: Snapshot
Due to the increased participation in voting and engagement on forums as a result of the delegate incentive program, we are directionally in favor of this proposal. V1.5 makes more sense to incorporate over v1.1 since 1.5 attempts to encourage more proactive and natural conversation than 1.1. The old model, to an extent, can feel forced. Our team has sometimes felt this way as well. It is also more valuable for proposers to attain feedback early on before going to a vote. Delegates also change their behavior on forums with the 1.5 setup since they are now actively perusing through open discussions as opposed to solely justifying votes.
[Non-Constitutional] Funds to Bolster Foundation’s Strategic Partnerships Budget
Vote: For
Type: On Chain
We are in favor of this budget, albeit massive, needed for the continuous function of the teams strategies.
ArbitrumDAO strategic “Off-site” (online) updated proposal
Vote: For
Type: On Chain
We are voting in line with our snapshot support; looking forward to this online offsite.
Enhancing Multichain Governance: Upgrading RARI Governance Token on Arbitrum
Vote: For
Type: On Chain
The RARI token being upgraded makes sense and continuing our support.
[Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum DAO Delegate Incentive Program
Vote: For
Type: On Chain
We are voting in line with our snapshot vote, v1.5 should be a much more holistic approach to this topic.
Fund the Stylus Sprint
Vote: For
Type: On Chain
We are in favor of the new team members added to this proposal and are excited to see the success of the Sprint.