Proposal: ArbitrumDAO Procurement Committee Phase II
Type: Snapshot, ended Sep 12, 2024
Vote: Yes - Extend
Reasoning: The ADPC has done great work in their first term and we’re excited to see them tackle more verticals. At the same time, like other delegates have mentioned, we don’t think skipping elections is setting a good precedent. We’re considering this a one time extension as we believe that the security provider process needs to continue with as few disruptions as possible. We do not see either of the two proposed verticals in work package 1 as nearly as important and will not vote in favor of an automatic extension if there is a similar situation with either of them.
Proposal: Enhancing Multichain Governance: Upgrading RARI Governance Token on Arbitrum
Type: Snapshot, ended Sep 12, 2024
Vote: For
Reasoning: We see no reason this shouldn’t happen, but think it could be useful to set up a standard process for this kind of upgrade if we can expect it to be needed by other projects as well.
Proposal: Fund the Stylus Sprint
Type: Snapshot, ended Sep 12, 2024
Vote: For
Reasoning: Stylus is something we should be taking full advantage of, allowing people to write smart contracts in languages other than solidity is a huge unlock. Helping teams take the first step towards actually using Stylus and creating reusable pieces for others is something we see as clearly worth funding.
Proposal: Constitutional AIP: Proposal to adopt Timeboost, a new transaction ordering policy
Type: Snapshot, ended Sep 19, 2024
Vote: Collect bids in ETH to treasury
Reasoning: Of the mechanisms in Delphi Digital’s report, we see Timeboost as the best option. Though we recognize that this may introduce new forms of MEV as described in Chaos Labs’ analysis we think any major harms can be mitigated through changing parameters or even completely disabling Timeboost if necessary. While we think this will be a positive change to the ecosystem, we’d like to see close monitoring of the effects so that any potential harm is caught early. We voted to collect bids in ETH since we see it as a way to diversify the treasury without diluting ARB even more than it is now.
Proposal: Terms of Tenure for STEP program manager
Type: Snapshot, ended Sep 19, 2024
Vote: 1) Additional funds for one year 2) New election 3) 6 months from available funds 4) Liquidation of RWAs 5) Abstain
Reasoning: STEP is a valuable program for the DAO and we think it’s important to keep it alive. We’d also like to see it run for the full length of time it was originally planned for. While it’s unfortunate that we won’t make as much from the yield, we believe that retaining the manager the DAO selected for their expertise is better than selecting a new one, and so would most like to see a portion of the yield used to cover the rest of the payment. This isn’t the first time we’ve had to deal with shifting ARB prices, and we expect that learnings from those and this proposal will lead to future proposals being better thought out.
Proposal: [Aave DAO] LTIPP Grant Extension Request
Type: Snapshot, ended Sep 19, 2024
Vote: Abstain
Reasoning: Similar to our reasoning on Pyth and Synthetix, we would like to see a policy regarding extensions set out at the beginning of the program so that all projects are on equal footing when it comes to planning their incentive programs.
Proposal: ArbitrumDAO Off-site
Type: Snapshot, ended Sep 19, 2024
Vote: 1) Online Event 2) Drop Idea and do nothing 3) Abstain 4) IRL/conference/no scholarship 5) IRL/conference/scholarship 6) IRL/separate/no scholarships 7) IRL/separate scholarships
Reasoning: We don’t think this should be run at DevCon Thailand as it would overlap with GovHack, which we are more confident in supporting. While these events may not serve the same purpose, we see no reason to run them both at the same time in the same place. We don’t think an meeting separate from a major event makes much sense either, having this kind of meeting next to other major events allows more people to attend, whereas they may not be able to justify going to a stand alone meeting. We’re not sure scholarships are a good idea at the moment without a good framework to help pick candidates, but could be open to them in the future. Given all of this, we believe that an online event could get some work started, and once there’s some momentum built an in-person meeting could make sense in collaboration with GovHack at another major event.