Web3 Citizen Delegate Communication Thread

Governance Delegate Statements
1

Name: Web3 Citizen @web3citizenxyz
Members: @ocandocrypto @eugenia

Twitter: https://x.com/web3citizenxyz
Website: https://www.web3citizen.xyz/

Brief Introduction

Web3 Citizen is a research collective with the mission to empower the Web3 community by making complex topics accessible. As a community-centered project, we all contribute to expanding our collective knowledge and commit to open sourcing our insights. Members of our team have contributed to Arbitrum governance under the delegate address ocando.eth (@ocandocrypto), we look forward to collaborating in shaping the future of the Arbitrum ecosystem with Web3 Citizen.

As delegates, we commit to aligning with ArbitrumDAO’s mission, making informed decisions, and participating in governance to effectively drive growth.

Core Issues:

  • Decentralization: Minimizing the reliance of any single actor by building a resilient, trustless protocol.
  • Governance: Prioritizes collaborative decision-making that is fair, transparent, and accountable whilst upholding the protocols best interests.
  • Builders: Focused on empowering builders with the necessary tools, resources, and support to help them thrive and create innovative applications.
  • Community: Believes in building a strong community by engaging with people locally and globally while fostering collaboration across regions.

In this thread we’ll share our thoughts and rationale.

Note: you’ll see our votes under one of our members delegate address ocando.eth

1 Like
2

Onchain vote: Arbitrum Research & Development Collective

We are voting FOR this proposal, following our voting during the Snapshot vote.

We support the continuation of the ARDC and advancing the work issues of risk and research, building upon previous work of V1.

3

Onchain vote: Establishing a DAO Events Budget for 2025

We are voting FOR this proposal, following our voting and rationale during the Snapshot vote:

The ArbitrumDAO currently has no dedicated budget planning for events and this proposal can bring a working framework to plan events in the coming year. We also agree that this proposal furthers the ability for the DAO to represent itself.

We’re also happy to see community feedback incorporated into the final proposal!

4

Snapshot vote: Treasury Management v1.2

We are voting FOR this proposal in the Snapshot stage.

Council structure and recommendations

While we do understand the hesitation behind creating two entities to forward treasury management, we believe given the broad nature of the stated goals it does make sense to have two teams to provide multiple viewpoints on investment options for the DAO to review and approve. This could also have been achieved with two teams operating under a single committee.

We appreciate that the proposal ensures that the DAO retains a final say on whether on not to approve the committee’s recommendations.

Selection of members

Reading through other delegates’ input we believe, in this instance, the process could have benefited from two separate proposals (creation of committees and ratifying its members.) Trusting Entropy’s due diligence regarding the candidates, we will vote in favour.

Additional Specifics:

As mentioned by other delegates, the inclusion of indicators and metrics to be followed by the committees would give us more confidence to vote FOR in the Tally vote.

5

Snapshot vote: Hackathon Continuation Program

We will vote in favour, onchain mechanism

We believe this proposal holds the necessary components to ensure hackathon projects can continue to work on their concepts and, given validation and fit, continue development with the support of the ecosystem.

Assessment criteria and budget seem reasonable. And we’re generally in support of the thinking and planning behind the proposal:

Re: extending selection

We would not lower the threshold for this pilot, as that would require more mentorship and hands-on effort for those projects still in the exploratory stage. Though maybe in future iterations it would make sense.

1 Like
6

Snapshot vote: Restitution For Extensively Delayed ArbitrumDAO Minigrant Winners

We will vote against this proposal

On the one hand, the payouts was delayed due to inefficiencies. On the other hand, the proposal sets a precedent on restitution of funds that we are not convinced by and, as many highlighted, the original amount was denominated in non stable tokens, price fluctuation –even in the worst scenario– should be expected.

Ultimately, we agree with sentiments expressed by other delegates in that the DAO should learn from this experience moving forward, choose grant managers accordingly and clearly structure payout timelines.

7

Snapshot vote: Designing and operating the reporting and information function

We will vote against this proposal

As voiced in this comment, our rationale is as follows.

We see the value in the mission and support it. It makes sense to have a standarized framework to track progress, performance, and results, not just in terms of efficiency but also to propose new initiatives in the future, track spending, general initiative and success tracking, having DAO benchmarks.

We believe the proposal needs refining for clarity, so we’re glad to see you plan to move to a second snapshot with the improvements. Our main concern lies in KPI, targets of the proposal and clarity of the approach. We also do agree with the points raised above on the high budget and retroactive pay by other delegates.

We’ll be voting against for now in the snapshot. But we are open to changing our vote.

8

Snapshot vote: User Research: Why build on Arbitrum?

We will vote for this proposal, For + 2 ecosystems.

Our rationale is as follows.

We appreciate the goal setting and results in a research report as outlined in the proposal, and recommend the inclusion of specific recommendations/actionable takeaways in the final phase of completion. These outcomes can inform choices of domain allocators in the future, among funding and ideating other initiatives, ensuring they align well and effectively drive growth in Arbitrum. We should strive for efficiency and growth and we believe this can help the DAO get there.

Our questions regarding ARDC overlapping with the goals were addressed in the FAQs and this comment.

The goals stated make much more sense when comparing Arbitrum with two other ecosystems. We believe opting for this choice will give ArbitrumDAO a more comprehensive understanding of the builder landscape.

9

Snapshot vote: ARDC V2 Elections

Risk: Nethermind Research

Nethermind holds enough expertise and experience assessing technical and financial risks. They also has a broad scope in experience with topics in DeFi and protocols. We liked their approach in structuring research both in depth but also keeping community members informed on complex topics; and their focus on projects of risk modeling and management, restaking analysis and post-deployment impact of staking.

Security: OpenZeppelin

OpenZeppelin reputation needs no introduction. They have provided security services in the past and have held active roles in Arbitrum, as well as held a position in ARDC V1. We trust that they are well positioned to hold a spot in ARDC V2.

Research: 70% Blockworks + 30% PYOR

After careful consideration, reviewing again candidates presentations and applications we decided to split our vote.

Blockworks past experience and deliverables were the main reason behind our support for them. Beyond their scope of research into incentives, we are interested in the inclusion in scope for their additional initiatives of a developer centric framework, and a timeboost allocation framework and financial audits (as we believe not all focus should be placed in incentive frameworks).

PYOR: We’ve explored their research in the past, and appreciate their approach in analysis. We particularly align with their proposed verticals in revenue analysis, liquidity attraction and analysis of tooling and cross chain infrastructure to improve developer experience.

Supervisory Council Election

Operations Role: Entropy + Tamara
The only candidate for this role, but we look forward to see results of this collaboration!

Comms role
We split our vote between James and JuanRah + Alex Lumley.

Jameskbh has had great experience in Karpatkey collaborating with DAOs as well as a delegate. Overall great candidate.

We also voted for JuanRah + Alex Lumley for the Communications role. We believe they hold the necessary experience and priorities in planning, executing and coordinating communication strategies across the DAO.

1 Like
10

Snapshot vote: Arbitrum Onboarding V2

We will abstain from this vote, due to our involvement in the proposal.

1 Like
11

Snapshot Vote: Arbitrum Domain Allocator Offerings (D.A.O.)

We ar voting: Renew with 5 domains

As voiced in this previous comment, we fully support the continuation of the program.

  • Inclusion of Orbit as a new Domain
  • Inclusion of a checkpoint after their final milestone and metric
  • Details on reporting to be included in the proposal in the Tally stage

Excited to see what comes with this new iteration!

12

Snapshot Vote: ETH Bucharest Partnership

We are voting: For, without POAP

As we voiced with this comment, we like the POAP activation engagement and a fun activity around the brand, however, we continue to find that the general package and hackathon support add on provides the best value for cost for Arbitrum.

With this option we would get substantial presence in the event while sponsoring tracks to attract builders and developers. The ETH Bucharest partnership is a great way to support growth and adoption in Eastern Europe and Bucharest, and we’d like to see Arbitrum support it and be part of that growth!

13

Snapshot Vote: Unifying Arbitrum’s Mission, Vision, Purpose (MVP)

We are voting: FOR

We appreciate the collaboration involved in shaping this initiative. Drawing inspiration from Lido’s model is a smart move.

Overall rationale on our support: making informed decisions to move the ecosystem forward requires having guidelines and a purpose, specially to avoid redundant work and funding overlapping initiatives. Would love to see this proposal move forward and a version on Alex’s proposal to track all initiatives.

Thank you for bringing this proposal forward!

14

Snapshot: OpCo

Vote: Against

This proposal was very thorough and we took our time to review it.

What we like:

  • Establishes a structure that reduces reliance on individual contributors, ensuring critical tasks and working groups maintain continuity. This is key to bring more sustainability to our initiatives.
  • Preserves ultimate control within the DAO.

Concerns:

  • Introduces an additional governance and coordination layer. While it aims to increase efficiency, it risks centralizing decision-making. As Gauntlet noted, much depends on execution, and despite a thorough review, we feel it lacks a clear guidance and a fixed scope in order to not over extend itself.
  • May significantly impact DAO participation and its permissionless nature.
  • Would like to see some clarity on the role of Chaos Coordinators.

This proposal has the potential to fundamentally alter the DAO’s operations and we believe if we move forward with this proposal, the path should be clearer. For these reasons, we vote Against at this stage.

15

Tally: Hackathon Continuation Program

We are voting for this proposal

As mentioned in our Snapshot rationale, we believe this proposal works to ensure hackathon projects can continue to work and develop with the support of the ecosystem.

While we understand concerns about other delegates, this pilot can test a path for Arbitrum to invest and re-invest in its builders, which can create meaningfully impact our builder community and growth of the ecosystem.

16

Tally: Treasury Management V1.2

We are voting for.

We are reaffirming our support for this proposal for the same reasons we voiced in our previous rationale. This proposal represents a positive step toward more effective treasury management

17

Snapshot: Stable Treasury Endowment Program 2.0

We are voting for.

We support STEP’s goal of diversifying the treasury and fostering growth in the RWA ecosystem.

By focusing on stable, liquid RWAs, and maintaining a similar scope to the previous iteration, the proposal aligns with prudent financial management and ecosystem development. And it also helps generate yield to cover DAO operational costs.

Thank you for the proposal!

18

Snapshot: Arbitrum D.A.O. Elections

Education, Community Growth and Events: SeedGov

SeedGov holds outstanding experience in conducting programs and background in educational initiatives and events within and beyond the Arbitrum ecosystem. We align with their priorities and views when choosing grant candidates.

New Potocol Ideas Election: 66% Saurabh and 33% Uhthread

Saurabh has the necessary experience in managing grants programs and supporting grant applicants which makes her a great candidate for this position. We align with their views on good grant proposals (trackrecord, objectives, and deal breakers).

We like Uhthread’s dealbreakers, high standards for proposals and views as expressed in his candidacy post. Though he holds no specific experience managing a grants program, his background on due diligence, advisory and analysis together with his decision framework made us confident in our choice to include him in our vote.

Dev Tooling: andreiv

Andreiv brings his technical expertise, a strong understanding of the Arbitrum ecosystem, mentoring and firsthand experience as both a developer and end-user of developer tooling. His focus on quality-driven developer tools, makes him an ideal candidate for this role.

Gaming: Flook

We are supporting Flook for the gaming DA due to their deep expertise in web3 gaming and content creation. Their experience with game development, user acquisition strategies, and onboarding web2 creators positions them to drive impactful grant decisions, expanding Arbitrum’s gaming ecosystem through quality content and user engagement.

Good luck to all candidates!

19

Snapshot: The Watchdog (Grant Misuse Bounty Program)

We are voting FOR this proposal.

We support the establishment of an accountability system through the Watchdog Bounty to incentivize identifying and reporting fund misappropriation. Rewarding community contributors for report submissions enhances transparency. We are specially in support of the inclusion of a 6 month retrospective report with a follow-up vote to evaluate program success.

20

Tally: Activate Arbitrum BoLD + Infura Nova Validator Whitelist

We’re glad to see this proposal move onchain. After taking time to review the proposal, latest audits and documents we are voting in favor of this proposal.

BoLD is an important step on Arbitrum’s path to decentralization. Given its audits and reviews we feel confident in moving forward with the upgrade. On Infura’s whitelisting it will contribute to the network’s security and robustness by increasing the number of active validators on Nova with an actor who has already participated in Arbitrum Nova’s DAC.