# Zeptimus Delegate Communication Thread **URL:** \ **Category:** Delegate Statements\ **Created:** [February 1, 2025, 5:08pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328 "2025-02-01T17:08:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2025, 5:08pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/1 "2025-02-01T17:08:32Z")
Zeptimus.eth - **Forum Username (Link):** [zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/zeptimus/summary) - **Twitter Profile (Link):**[@zeptimusq](https://x.com/zeptimusQ) - **Snapshot Profile (Link):**[Snapshot](https://snapshot.box/#/profile/0x3ef1b0db4d10d2e3ce06699c0bd4ef0aaf897614) - **Tally Profile (Link):** [Tally](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/delegate/zeptimus.eth) - **Karma (Link):**[Karma](https://arbitrum.karmahq.xyz/profile/zeptimus.eth#overview) **About me:** Transparency and accountability advocate. A passionate representative focused on decentralized governance. Diving into Arbitrum because traditional governance is broke and I believe I can have a positive impact here. I’m excited to be part of a system that pushes our boundaries, prioritizes community agency, and rewards genuine problem-solving. Been deep in Web3, working on how we fund and support public goods. I’d love to make building public goods as competitive and exciting as any startup hustle. I love healthy and fair competition and having clear rules is necessary to keep each other accountable. Thats why im so fired up about creating unbiased governance with AI agents. We need to work together and keep AI open source. If we don’t, we’re basically selling our future to big tech. When I’m not breaking down DAO structures, I’m either taking hits in Muay Thai, playing calisthenics or finding my flow on a snowboard. ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2025, 5:29pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/2 "2025-02-03T17:29:36Z")
**[Tally]** **[Non-Constitutional: Stable Treasury Endowment Program 2.0](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/proposal/13323456481927947871314500108227684550647495448005726995657704713229313956489?govId=eip155:42161:0x789fC99093B09aD01C34DC7251D0C89ce743e5a4)** I’m voting for this one. RWA is trending, and funny enough, just today ETH dropped to $2,170 on Binance, and MANTRA, the top RWA coin, is up 14% while all the alts dropped hard as well. I’m citing this as an argument to support the proposal. I also believe that with boomers joining the party, this will keep going up. Why would I hold these papers with all those legal bureaucracies just to say a house is mine? I believe RWA is a needed tech for the cryptoanarchist dream I believe we are moving towards. I don’t like the idea of selling ARB, especially without a plan to buy back, but voting yes because I believe it’s good to capture this value. **[OpCo: A DAO-adjacent Entity for Strategy Execution](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/proposal/41351298371775353090222506531903916823291804644712693824312064183457809617851?govId=eip155:42161:0x789fC99093B09aD01C34DC7251D0C89ce743e5a4)** I voted NO because I believe DAOs should operate with the minimum structure necessary. We need to stay as decentralized as possible, allowing initiatives to grow organically and enabling the community to swarm toward the ultimate goal of increasing ARB’s value by showing growth within our ecosystem. Additionally, while not the sole reason for my vote, I’d like to point out that the proposal lacks clear execution details, such as how OpCo will be structured, how leadership will be chosen, and what mechanisms will ensure alignment with DAO governance. **[Snapshot]****[Approve the Nova Fee Sweep Action](https://snapshot.box/#/s:arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0xbd77b4faf99e06c7b4117e5dafaf5bb8f873bcffbb5c9d414a7ff745b6849f3a)** I’m voting FOR this proposal. It make sense to send the ETH where it can be managed. Im also supportive of comments of using the eth to get yield . ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2025, 11:16am UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/3 "2025-02-09T11:16:25Z")
**[Tally]** **[Arbitrum D.A.O. (Domain Allocator Offerings) Grant Program - Season 3](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/arbitrum/proposal/47215139570733026393508270943324710379923699871435188004224569883226292800465?govId=eip155:42161:0x789fC99093B09aD01C34DC7251D0C89ce743e5a4)** Questbook has been doing a good job, it’s a great place for grantees to get onboarded on Arbitrum. The budget it’s growing but their asking is reasonable, they are allocating more funds to. Their ask is below 10% which is quite competitive in the space, lets see it grow and looking forward to season 3 results. **[Snapshot]****[Request to Increase the Stylus Sprint Committee’s Budget](https://snapshot.box/#/s:arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x45513bb63946582432afa7213bcb2677e877dabbd5722210efd5eaf45797031c?app=x23ai)** Voting YES. The extra projects proposed here are solid - improving oracles, zk tech development tools, and other key infrastructure for Arbitrum. This is exactly the kind of strategic investment we need. I like how transparent this request is - we can see exactly which projects would get funded and why. This sets a good precedent for how to ask for additional funding: show the community specific high-value projects that couldn’t make the initial cut. I disagree with the sentiment to open this for new applications. We had a successful process, these are the overflow projects that scored high but couldn’t get funded due to budget constraints. Let’s keep it focused on these specific projects rather than opening a new funding round. After seeing the results of the project as a whole we can re-evaluate it. ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2025, 3:43pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/4 "2025-02-18T15:43:52Z")
**Snapshot** > [@Arbitrum Growth Circles Event Proposal](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/arbitrum-growth-circles-event-proposal/28375/26): > > I voted no. Like Entropy said, its too vague with inflated costs. When I commented on this last week I thought it was gonna be meditated and refined before going to snapshot. That Program Design & Development line - 10k just to figure out what to do? I thought we were doing that on the forums. I get that work needs funds but at least outline the plan first. I’d love to see proposals with more meat before approval, not just “we’ll figure it out later”. Arbitrum needs efficient spending, not blank… ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2025, 7:41pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/5 "2025-02-20T19:41:06Z")
**Tally** > [@Request to Increase the Stylus Sprint Committee’s Budget](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/request-to-increase-the-stylus-sprint-committee-s-budget/28312/84): > > Voting For onchain keep the same though as before, the level of the extra proposals its excelent and worth the extra budget. ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2025, 3:13pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/6 "2025-02-25T15:13:17Z")
**Snapshot** > [@\[CONSTITUTIONAL\] AIP: ArbOS Version 40 Callisto](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/constitutional-aip-arbos-version-40-callisto/28436/20): > > Despite not having a technical background, my initial thought was that we’re leveling up our gear to stay aligned with Ethereum’s Pectra upgrade, and that makes sense. Also, I trust Arb devs, and there are no major concerns in this thread, which is why I’m voting for it. > [@Arbitrum Audit Program](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/arbitrum-audit-program/28368/54): > > I abstained from voting because while security audits are crucial, this proposal lacks sufficient justification for creating a new program instead of improving the existing ADPC Security Subsidy Fund. Also, I’d like to see a stronger commitment to treasury management (keeping funds in ARB) and clearer accountability mechanisms. Until these concerns are addressed, I prefer not to take a stance. ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2025, 5:37pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/7 "2025-03-09T17:37:23Z")
**Snapshot** > [@TMC’s Proposed Allocations](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/tmc-s-proposed-allocations/28522/42): > > The proposal could use a better labeling as “Proposal” to get more delegate engagement during the feedback period. I’m voting NO on the Stablecoin Strategy and YES on the ARB Strategy. Why I’m Voting NO on Stablecoin Conversion I trust all 3 candidates to do a good job and I also believe in having a stable strategy plan but the timing to sell ARB into stablecoins is terrible. Trump is likely to deliberately decrease the dollar’s value before negotiating the massive government debt that’s comin… ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2025, 3:39pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/8 "2025-03-20T15:39:09Z")
**Tally** > [@\[NON-CONSTITUTIONAL\] Arbitrum Onboarding V2: A Governance Bootcamp](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-arbitrum-onboarding-v2-a-governance-bootcamp/27546/140): > > I’m voting in favor of this proposal on Tally. It’s true that the cost is in the high end, but as a new member of the community, I’d love to have someone who can share the history of Arbitrum—why we are here and where we came from—so I can have better context when making decisions. I not new to DAOs and am comfortable reading and figuring things out on my own, but I also value the comfort of having a place where I can ask “dumb” questions and have someone take the time to answer. Getting people … > [@AIP: Timeboost + Nova Fee Sweep](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/aip-timeboost-nova-fee-sweep/28247/72): > > I’m voting FOR this proposal on tally. I dont have anything new to add, lets do it! ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2025, 5:07pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/9 "2025-03-21T17:07:22Z")
**Snapshot** > [@\[CONSTITUTIONAL\] Proposal: For Arbitrum DAO to register the Sky Custom Gateway contracts in the Router](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/constitutional-proposal-for-arbitrum-dao-to-register-the-sky-custom-gateway-contracts-in-the-router/28617/53): > > Im voting for this proposal, its a clear win-win, thanks for clarifying my concerns @spike_stablelab. > [@\[CONSTITUTIONAL\] Proposal: For Arbitrum DAO to register the Sky Custom Gateway contracts in the Router](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/constitutional-proposal-for-arbitrum-dao-to-register-the-sky-custom-gateway-contracts-in-the-router/28617/7): > > Thanks for the proposal—this looks like a win-win. I want to echo the audit sentiment and ensure we don’t run into any issues. Is the Sky team committed to maintaining and upgrading this integration if needed? For how long? Long-term support is key to ensuring this remains a reliable and efficient solution for the Arbitrum ecosystem. If yes, this integration seems like a solid step forward. > [@GMC's Preferred Choices for 7,500 ETH RFP](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/gmcs-preferred-choices-for-7-500-eth-rfp/28524/44): > > Thanks @Entropy for suggesting a plan to make our treasury work. I’ll be voting in favor of this proposal. I like to play it safe with Aave and Lido - the yields are just too good in terms of risk-reward to not have a huge part allocated to them. Helping grow projects on Arbitrum is important, and I see where everyone is coming from about supporting ecosystem growth. But I also put myself in Entropy’s shoes - this is a lot of money and a huge responsibility. When dealing with treasury funds, pr… ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2025, 5:41pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/10 "2025-03-21T17:41:21Z")
**Comments made before voting** > [@Non-Constitutional: Amendment to the Delegate Incentives Program](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-amendment-to-the-delegate-incentives-program/28331/24): > > TLDR: I like the direction of where the proposal is coming from. I believe the end goal of the DAO should be to bring ARB price up. Delegates’ compensation should be vested, and there’s no need for 50k or 500k limitation - every ARB counts! Hello, my name is Zeptimus, and I thought about joining the program right after seeing @thedevanshmehta tweet. Being compensated for sharing my insights here is what allows me to spend time on Arbitrum forums. First of all, thanks for carrying the flag on t… > [@\[Non-constitutional\]\[RFC\] ARB Incentives: User Acquisition for dApps & Protocols](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-rfc-arb-incentives-user-acquisition-for-dapps-protocols/28291/33): > > Thanks for the detailed proposal. The data showing that 0% of protocols know their LTV and only 21% know their CAC is exactly whats wrong with this space. Projects are just burning money without tracking results. I like the KPI approach and specially the idea that if you only achieve 60% of KPIs you only get 60% of funding. Thats some skin in the game right there! But instead of spreading resources thin, why not identify the few projects that could actually bring NEW users to Arbitrum? Im talk… > [@Arbitrum Audit Program](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/arbitrum-audit-program/28368/9): > > Good initiative and I’ve got some suggestions about the token mechanics. Converting 30M ARB to USD immediately is not the play here coz it creates unnecessary sell pressure. Instead, we should: Keep the funds in ARB and only convert when actually paying for audits Let auditors choose to receive payment in ARB if they want (maybe even incentivize it) If we’re bullish on Arbitrum’s (which this proposal shows we are), then keeping funds in ARB aligns everyone’s incentives. Plus, if ARB price go… > [@Arbitrum Growth Circles Event Proposal](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/arbitrum-growth-circles-event-proposal/28375/9): > > Interesting proposal but I’ve got mixed feelings on this one. Budget “TBD” is a red flag and KPIs are too soft. Where’s the actual builder outcomes? Need to track: Projects that actually deploy post-sessions TVL growth from participants Real market maker relationships formed The scaling OCL expertise part makes sense but let’s cut the fluff. $50k should have clear allocation upfront and focus on measurable results, not just feel-good workshops. Btw love @blockworksresearch suggestion about … > [@GCP Council Salary Updates, Ops Improvements, and Transparency Cadence](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/gcp-council-salary-updates-ops-improvements-and-transparency-cadence/28362/15): > > The ARB payment switch and moving to bi-annual reporting make sense - aligns incentives better and reduces operational overhead. BUT - can’t support the compensation increase just coz other DAOs are paying more. That’s the kind of thinking that leads to bloated governance. Each role should be compensated based on its actual value/impact. We need clear performance metrics that tie compensation to ecosystem growth results. What actual outcomes justify this 2.66x increase? I’d support the ARB pa… > [@Proposal: Not missing the AI train](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-not-missing-the-ai-train/28393/5): > > There’s a huge opportunity for Arbitrum here. Moving fast with an agile approach makes sense. Potential projects I’d be really exited about: AI agents with the end goal of buying ARB, similar to how a16z trades memes with its own token—but instead, focusing on real investments to ultimately buy back ARB. Start using AI to assess proposals and run a pilot—I want to see the potential of unbiased governance. A budget of 500K or any amount can’t be properly evaluated at this stage, as there are … > [@Grant Request: CyberCash - Driving Crypto Adoption on Arbitrum](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/grant-request-cybercash-driving-crypto-adoption-on-arbitrum/28389/8): > > It looks interesting, were can i learn about $CASH tokenomics? > [@Proposal: Not missing the AI train](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-not-missing-the-ai-train/28393/11): > > I mean this, how am i suppose to say thats a good investment or not with that information? Edit: And TBD KPI > [@\[NON-CONSTITUTIONAL\] Arbitrum Onboarding V2: A Governance Bootcamp](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-arbitrum-onboarding-v2-a-governance-bootcamp/27546/111): > > LFG! I recently joined DIP, and this will be helpful. Looking forward to it > [@\[Non-Constitutional\] Arbitrum Airdrop 2 - Builder Appreciation Drop](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-arbitrum-airdrop-2-builder-appreciation-drop/28428/10): > > Thanks for the proposal. While I’m curious about how this would impact governance dynamics, dropping 500M ARB seems too aggressive right now - especially since we hit ATL just 10 days ago as Argonaut pointed out. I align with Tekr0x about wanting to see more innovative solutions rather than copying other L2s’ retro funding. Would you be open to exploring more targeted approaches that don’t require such a large token distribution? > [@\[CONSTITUTIONAL\] AIP: ArbOS Version 40 Callisto](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/constitutional-aip-arbos-version-40-callisto/28436/4): > > Like @EzR3aL I dont have technical background but from what im reading we’re leveling up our gear to stay aligned with Ethereum’s Pectra upgrade. Makes sense, being Ethereum aligned is key for Arbitrum’s growth and token value. I trust the Arbitrum devs on this one, they’ve been solid on previous upgrades. I’m also curious to read more from technical folks. > [@Jumper x Merkl // MAGA 2025 \[Make-Arbitrum-Great-Again\]](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/jumper-x-merkl-maga-2025-make-arbitrum-great-again/28463/4): > > I love how the marketing (MAGA) is being play, I see some solid points but also some concerns: Good stuff: The 2-week iteration cycles + oversight committee is based. Way better than STIP/LTIPP where protocols got funds directly with barely any accountability Clear KPIs tied to actual market impact The double step of bridge + deposit requirement for incentives is smart to avoid internal recycling of funds But here’s what id like us to discuss more: Make sure funds are safu and dive deep on … > [@\[Constitutional\] Increase resilience to outside attackers by updating DAO parameters to not count 'Abstain' votes in Quorum.](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/constitutional-increase-resilience-to-outside-attackers-by-updating-dao-parameters-to-not-count-abstain-votes-in-quorum/28545/21): > > Nice topic to discuss Removing ABSTAIN from quorum count is a bad idea and goes against voting principles. Abstain is there for a reason - when you don’t count it toward quorum, you’re essentially making proposals harder to pass. Think about it: if we’re 4 friends and quorum is 3, 2 vote for, 1 against, and 1 abstains - this is clearly a proposal that should pass. The person abstaining is signaling they don’t have a strong opinion and want to go with the majority. LobbyFi having power isn’t s… > [@\[Constitutional\] Increase resilience to outside attackers by updating DAO parameters to not count 'Abstain' votes in Quorum.](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/constitutional-increase-resilience-to-outside-attackers-by-updating-dao-parameters-to-not-count-abstain-votes-in-quorum/28545/23): > > Then we should consider raising the quorum. There is no point in making “abstain” a useless button. > [@\[Constitutional\] Increase resilience to outside attackers by updating DAO parameters to not count 'Abstain' votes in Quorum.](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/constitutional-increase-resilience-to-outside-attackers-by-updating-dao-parameters-to-not-count-abstain-votes-in-quorum/28545/47): > > In that case, you would have 50% quorum, with 33% voting for and 66% voting against and the proposal would not pass. The role of abstaining is to signal that you want others to decide while still contributing to the quorum, ensuring it is not a blocker. If the majority votes against, the proposal won’t pass. Quorum is only relevant for yes votes. > [@Non-Constitutional: Stable Treasury Endowment Program 2.0](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-stable-treasury-endowment-program-2-0/26819/128): > > I didn’t vote on this one since it happened before I got onboarded, but I’m excited to see Arbitrum holding some RWA and hoping for the bull. I’m not happy with the ARB selling, though—I still see this as kind of like what Saylor is doing with BTC. LFG! > [@\[Constitutional\] Increase resilience to outside attackers by updating DAO parameters to not count 'Abstain' votes in Quorum.](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/constitutional-increase-resilience-to-outside-attackers-by-updating-dao-parameters-to-not-count-abstain-votes-in-quorum/28545/54): > > That’s not how it works. When you vote against, you don’t contribute to the quorum. Only “yes” and “abstain” votes count toward the quorum. Abstaining = I don’t have a strong opinion on this, but I will not block the decision the community makes. If a proposal is failing, abstaining will not make it pass. Abstaining does not add weight to “yes” votes. > [@\[Constitutional\] Increase resilience to outside attackers by updating DAO parameters to not count 'Abstain' votes in Quorum.](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/constitutional-increase-resilience-to-outside-attackers-by-updating-dao-parameters-to-not-count-abstain-votes-in-quorum/28545/59): > > Those are easy words to say behind a screen wink respect. We are here helping each other. Here is where you could had misunderstood my words. I wouldn’t call this proposal failing; I would call it winning but not passing. That’s a winning proposal without enough people looking into it. The moment other folks look into it and abstain, they are communicating that they don’t have the expertise/time to look into it in the detail it deserves and are trusting the people who are voting … ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2025, 5:44pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/11 "2025-03-21T17:44:29Z")
Apologies for the dump, I’m slowly understanding the mechanics of how this works. In my defense, I didn’t have an onboarding. From now on, every proposal will have one comment, and I will add the comments, snapshot signaling, and tally vote in that one comment to make it easier to follow. Thank you. ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2025, 5:47pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/12 "2025-03-21T17:47:57Z")
[[Non-Constitutional] Service Provider Utilisation Framework](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-service-provider-utilisation-framework/28771/3) **Comment before post** > [@\[Non-Constitutional\] Service Provider Utilisation Framework](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-service-provider-utilisation-framework/28771/3): > > Thanks for putting this framework together - it’s clear you’ve put thought into creating structure around service provider relationships. That said, I have some concerns about the approach. The oversight committee structure (7 members) seems to add an unnecessary layer between service providers and tokenholders. From my experience in governance, simpler structures tend to be more effective and resistant to bureaucratic capture. The KPI framework is definitely a step in the right direction. Per… ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2025, 11:59am UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/13 "2025-03-31T11:59:53Z")
[Arbitrum Audit Program](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/arbitrum-audit-program/28368/120) **Initial feedback** > [@Arbitrum Audit Program](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/arbitrum-audit-program/28368/9): > > Good initiative and I’ve got some suggestions about the token mechanics. Converting 30M ARB to USD immediately is not the play here coz it creates unnecessary sell pressure. Instead, we should: Keep the funds in ARB and only convert when actually paying for audits Let auditors choose to receive payment in ARB if they want (maybe even incentivize it) If we’re bullish on Arbitrum’s (which this proposal shows we are), then keeping funds in ARB aligns everyone’s incentives. Plus, if ARB price go… **Snapshot** > [@Arbitrum Audit Program](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/arbitrum-audit-program/28368/54): > > I abstained from voting because while security audits are crucial, this proposal lacks sufficient justification for creating a new program instead of improving the existing ADPC Security Subsidy Fund. Also, I’d like to see a stronger commitment to treasury management (keeping funds in ARB) and clearer accountability mechanisms. Until these concerns are addressed, I prefer not to take a stance. **Tally** > [@Arbitrum Audit Program](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/arbitrum-audit-program/28368/120): > > I will vote for abstain on Tally. There are strong reasons to support this proposal, such as its goal of lowering audit costs for early-stage projects, promoting ecosystem growth, and ensuring security through third-party audits. Also, the structured approach—DAO oversight, a technical expert, and transparency reports—demonstrates alignment with OpCo and responsible fund management. However, attempting to extract $10M from 30M ARB at the current price of $0.32 raises concerns. The proposal rel… ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2025, 10:44am UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/14 "2025-04-01T10:44:06Z")
**TMC Proposals Snapshot** [TMC Proposed Allocations V2 – Stablecoin Strategy](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/tmc-proposed-allocations-v2-stablecoin-strategy/28786/16) > [@TMC Proposed Allocations V2 -- Stablecoin Strategy](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/tmc-proposed-allocations-v2-stablecoin-strategy/28786/13): > > I was not supportive of the stablecoin strategy because of the bad timing for selling, but if the foundation will sell the ARB regardless, we better get those stables to work. Appreciate the good work on managing the treasury. Im voting Yes on snapshot [TMC Proposed Allocations V2 – ARB Strategy](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/tmc-proposed-allocations-v2-arb-strategy/28785/13) > [@TMC Proposed Allocations V2 -- ARB Strategy](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/tmc-proposed-allocations-v2-arb-strategy/28785/9): > > I’ll be voting Abstain on the ARB strategy. I’m supportive of both candidates to do a good job, but @threesigmaxyz recommending to vote no makes me be more cautious. I believe we can reconsider it and come again in 3 months. I also believe the market will be way different in 3 months from now, but that’s pure speculation. ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2025, 10:46am UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/15 "2025-04-01T10:46:45Z")
[OpCo – Oversight and Transparency Committee (OAT) Elections](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/opco-oversight-and-transparency-committee-oat-elections/28867/19) **Snapshot** > [@OpCo – Oversight and Transparency Committee (OAT) Elections](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/opco-oversight-and-transparency-committee-oat-elections/28867/18): > > All candidates bring valuable perspectives, and I appreciate their willingness to contribute. After reviewing, I’ll be voting for Patrick, Christopher, and Jana, as they stand out in my view. Patrick McCorry - Been in the DAO since day 1, knows all the broken processes from the inside. Christopher Cameron (PaperImperium) - MakerDAO veteran who’s seen governance entities go off the rails before, and will make sure OPCO stays focused and doesn’t overstep its mandate Jana Bertram - Strong operati… ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2025, 10:47am UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/16 "2025-04-01T10:47:54Z")
[[Non-Constitutional] Let’s get our huddles (aka. video calls) in order](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-lets-get-our-huddles-aka-video-calls-in-order/28890/11) **Feedback** > [@\[Non-Constitutional\] Let's get our huddles (aka. video calls) in order](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-lets-get-our-huddles-aka-video-calls-in-order/28890/10): > > I like the idea of playing with it. We don’t need it to be perfect - we need to start using what we already have. Even if the current tools aren’t ideal, real usage will only make it better. I believe in using Arb tech now and improving it through actual user testing and feedback. Let’s implement what we have, collect real-time user data, and iterate quickly. This approach builds better tools and strengthens our ecosystem simultaneously. ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2025, 10:50am UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/17 "2025-04-01T10:50:41Z")
[[Non-constitutional][RFC] ARB Incentives: User Acquisition for dApps & Protocols](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-rfc-arb-incentives-user-acquisition-for-dapps-protocols/28291/86) **Feedback** > [@\[Non-constitutional\]\[RFC\] ARB Incentives: User Acquisition for dApps & Protocols](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-rfc-arb-incentives-user-acquisition-for-dapps-protocols/28291/33): > > Thanks for the detailed proposal. The data showing that 0% of protocols know their LTV and only 21% know their CAC is exactly whats wrong with this space. Projects are just burning money without tracking results. I like the KPI approach and specially the idea that if you only achieve 60% of KPIs you only get 60% of funding. Thats some skin in the game right there! But instead of spreading resources thin, why not identify the few projects that could actually bring NEW users to Arbitrum? Im talk… **Snapshot** > [@\[Non-constitutional\]\[RFC\] ARB Incentives: User Acquisition for dApps & Protocols](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-rfc-arb-incentives-user-acquisition-for-dapps-protocols/28291/83): > > I vote against on this proposal. I would like it to be a smaller experiment using existing grant programs in Arbitrum first. I’m also hesitant to vote in favor until we first align with the mission and vision of Arbitrum. When that is clear, we will have an easier road to make decisions. > [@\[Non-constitutional\]\[RFC\] ARB Incentives: User Acquisition for dApps & Protocols](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/non-constitutional-rfc-arb-incentives-user-acquisition-for-dapps-protocols/28291/86): > > There is this page where we can see all the grants of Arbitrum: [Arbitrum — Grants](https://arbitrum.foundation/grants?utm_source=chatgpt.com). I believe the Arbitrum Foundation Grant Program coming soon is the best fit for this type of proposal. Great job on putting this proposal together! I appreciate the thought and effort you’ve put into aligning it with Arbitrum’s goals. In my view, we need a clearer roadmap to determine what to prioritize first. I also prefer to see a smaller pilot first and, if successful, scale it bigger. ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2025, 2:43pm UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/18 "2025-04-14T14:43:24Z")
[Proposal: enable the new TogetherCrew functionality: Free\* summarizer and Q&A for delegates telegram chat](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-enable-the-new-togethercrew-functionality-free-summarizer-and-q-a-for-delegates-telegram-chat/29024) **Feedback** > [@Proposal: enable the new TogetherCrew functionality: Free\* summarizer and Q&A for delegates telegram chat](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-enable-the-new-togethercrew-functionality-free-summarizer-and-q-a-for-delegates-telegram-chat/29024/2): > > I fully support the idea of making this type of information available. I belive in information being accessible. I don’t like the idea of people opting out, and I’m also curious how it can be demonstrated that we didn’t take information from someone in particular. You can tell the bot not to mention that person, but their knowledge and their lessons will still be accessible - and they should be (unless you truly erase the data, witch isnt fun). I’m personally asking for a grant on Questbook. A… ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2025, 10:56am UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/19 "2025-04-18T10:56:25Z")
[March 2025 Member Election Phase](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/march-2025-member-election-phase/29013) **Tally** > [@March 2025 Member Election Phase](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/march-2025-member-election-phase/29013/9): > > I’ve cast my votes for Michael Lewellen, bartek.eth, and yoav.eth in the Security Council election. Michael Lewellen brings crucial hands-on security expertise from his work with Immunefi and substantial background in smart contract security. In governance, technical competence must take priority over political considerations - especially when dealing with protocol security.I admire the way he communicate on the security council call being extremely communicative which is also a very important … ---
**Author:** ![Zeptimus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/forum.arbitrum.foundation/zeptimus/32/5471_2.png) [@Zeptimus](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/u/Zeptimus)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2025, 11:42am UTC](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328/20 "2025-04-21T11:42:30Z")
[Proposal [Non-consitutional]: Top-up for Hackathon Continuation Program](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/proposal-non-consitutional-top-up-for-hackathon-continuation-program/29064) **Feedback** > [@Hackathon Continuation Program](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/hackathon-continuation-program/27492/152): > > Looking at this proposal more critically, I have concerns about the underlying value proposition. While I understand the intention to support builders, ARB’s downward price movement appears correlated with sell pressure from our various funding initiatives. Before approving additional top-ups, we should address this fundamental issue. What’s missing from this proposal is essential context - which specific projects from the previous round are actually bringing demonstrable value to the ecosyste… [Next page](https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/zeptimus-delegate-communication-thread/28328.md?page=2)