Zeptimus Delegate Communication Thread

[Zeptimus]

Comments made before voting

Non-Constitutional: Amendment to the Delegate Incentives Program

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

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

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

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

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

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

It looks interesting, were can i learn about $CASH tokenomics?

Proposal: Not missing the AI train

[imagen] 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

LFG! I recently joined DIP, and this will be helpful. Looking forward to it

[Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum Airdrop 2 - Builder Appreciation Drop

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

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]

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

[image] Those are easy words to say behind a screen 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 …