Name (organization or individual): Galxe

Wallet Address or ENS

0x5aB0Fdc6F0CA9Ea178c95cECCf944A4ce1AedDdD

galxe.eth

Tally Profile URL

https://www.tally.xyz/profile/bulletlabs.eth

What area are you most interested in contributing to? choose up to two tags:

• NFT development on Arbitrum
• Tooling, Improving protocol decentralization

Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO: eg — how aggressive should we be in liquidity mining, what is the goal of the DAO?Please share your stance on issues that were raised previously, in other communities, as described below:

We do acknowledge that liquidity mining can be a powerful tool for incentivizing participation and development, and that ensuring a fair distribution of rewards is crucial, though we’re not taking a specific position at this time, as initially we’d need to review the underlying mechanism.

The overarching objective of the Arbitrum DAO should be to uphold the fundamental principles of Web3, such as decentralization, and at the same time foster a culture of innovation and facilitating efficient decision-making processes. As the Ethereum ecosystem becomes more competitive, it is important that the DAO remains agile and responsive to new developments in the space.

Sample Voting Issue 1:

1. How would you vote?

Against

Regarding the proposal to attract new users to Uniswap through bounties, we would vote against it as currently structured. While the program outline and funding may be fine, the proposal gives Flipside crypto too much control over allocating UNI to bounties and oversight of the entire program. This centralization of power and favoritism towards one service provider could lead to an unfair distribution of funds.

2. What amendments would you make to the proposal if any?

To address this, we would propose reducing Flipside’s control over the allocation and oversight committees. A more equitable distribution of seats should be pursued, with representation from multiple analytics service providers and community members. This would help prevent centralization and favoritism towards a single service provider. Also, other analytics service providers should be included in the proposal, promoting collaboration, transparency, and a more balanced approach to the entire program. Clear guidelines and criteria for allocating UNI bounties should also be established, making sure that the process is transparent and objective, without any influence from specific stakeholders.

3. How would you approach the tradeoff between centralization of authority and the ability to get things done?

When it comes to the tradeoff between centralization of authority and the ability to get things done, we believe that everything has its place. However, we lean more towards the decentralization answer. Committees or delegates fulfill the vital function of representing the voice of many in order to optimize governance processes. Still, diversity of opinions and participants should be the main objective of a DAO.

---

Sample Voting Issue 2:

Split reimbursement.

We believe a split reimbursement is the most reasonable approach in the Rari hack, because it allows for a fair distribution of the financial burden among the affected parties, and prevents any one group from bearing the full cost of the attack.

Determining the appropriate split is a difficult task that needs careful evaluation, since there are factors such as the severity of the hack, the degree of shared responsibility among the affected parties, and the overall financial health of the DAO must all be taken into account. Even if a split reimbursement may not fully satisfy any one party, it is often the most equitable solution and can help to prevent any long-lasting damage to the DAO’s reputation and financial stability.

Languages I speak and write:

English, Mandarin, Russian, French

Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:

We confirm that we have no conflicts of interest.