Proposal: Set up a Sub-Committee for the Security Services Subsidy Fund
Type: Type: Snapshot, ended Jun 6, 2024
Vote: Against
Reasoning: In a perfect world without restrictions on time or resources we could have separate committees for each part of a program, however we are voting against this as we agree that a creation of a sub-commitee would introduce delays, complexity, and cost that the DAO would be better without. However, we would like to strongly suggest that the ADPC follows through with the suggestion to present selected recipients to the DAO for optimistic approval as mentioned in the link below. We believe this can be done regardless of whether a module is ready or not as STIP Bridge recipients recently went through a similar process without needing one.
Proposal: AIP: Nova Fee Router Proposal (ArbOS 30)
Type: Snapshot, ended June 6, 2024
Vote: For
Reasoning: Automating fee collection to be delivered to the DAO treasury reduces operational complexity.
Proposal: AIP: Activate Stylus and Enable Next-Gen WebAssembly Smart Contracts (ArbOS 30)
Type: Snapshot, ended June 6, 2024
Vote: For
Reasoning: Allowing developers to work on Arbitrum in languages other than Solidity opens the doors to many more potential builders.
Proposal: AIP: Support RIP-7212 for Account Abstraction Wallets (ArbOS 30)
Type: Snapshot, ended June 6, 2024
Vote: For
Reasoning: Account abstraction will play a large role in how users interact with crypto in the future. This proposal allows Arbitrum to keep pace with other major L2s in this regard.
Proposal: Grant Request - Curve Finance
Type: Onchain, ended May 28, 2024
Vote: For
Reasoning: Same as snapshot (Vertex Delegate Communication Thread - #9 by Vertex_Protocol)
Proposal: Front-end interface to force transaction inclusion during sequencer downtime
Type: Onchain, ended Jun 3, 2024
Vote: For
Reasoning: Tooling of this kind helps keep Arbitrum aligned with the ethos of decentralization, and allows everyday users to benefit from it when it’s really needed.
Proposal: Pilot Phase: M&A for Arbitrum DAO
Type: Onchain, ended Jun 2, 2024
Vote: For
Reasoning: We voted for on this, as we believe that the DAO looking into M&A is worth the time and resources. We’re not sure if there are enough viable targets, but look forward to the results of this pilot to judge whether this should be a direction the DAO continues to go.
Proposal: Catalyze Gaming Ecosystem Growth on Arbitrum
Type: Onchain, ended Jun 7, 2024
Vote: For
Reasoning: We voted ‘for’ on this, but would consider voting along with a proposal to repeal or revise if it is put forward. We think that Arbitrum can use another identity along with being the chain for DeFi, and gaming could very well be this vertical. We also acknowledge that supporting game development can be an expensive process, and that it would take significant funding to give teams a fair shot. However, we think that spending this much needs a high level of consensus from the DAO, and with almost 25% of the votes on this proposal being against, we think there may be some work to be done to bring other delegates on board before continuing with the venture.
Proposal: Constitutional AIP - Security Council Improvement Proposal
Type: Onchain, ended Jun 9, 2024
Vote: For
Reasoning: Security should always be prioritized, and this is a relatively simple change to help keep the chain safer.
Proposal: ArbitrumDAO Contribution; Safeguarding Software Developers’ Rights
Type: Onchain, ended Jun 9, 2024
Vote: For
Reasoning: Same as snapshot (Vertex Delegate Communication Thread - #8 by Vertex_Protocol)