Name (organization): ITU Blockchain

ENS: itublockchain.eth

Tally Profile URL: Tally | itublockchain.eth

What area are you most interested in contributing to? choose up to two tags:
Improving Governance participation
Tooling, Improving protocol decentralization

Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
Main goals of DAOs

Decentralization:
The DAOs as it states on its name are Decentralized Autonomous Organizations. They provide the decentralization by creating an organization of individuals opposing authority. The decisions that will be made are getting decided by each one of the parties of that organization rather than an authority containing several people. By this way, a democratic and decentralized system is being made and therefore, bring out one of the main goals of the DAOs which is decentralization.

Publicity
All the votes that were done on the chain are always visible to the others which makes a DAO more trustworthy as well as clear. Publicity is one of the key points for a DAO not only because of that but also it makes the voters be heard publicly and could give them reputation which will end up making them feel valued. Since the voters can also see other votes as well, it will also make them trust the DAO even more and it will make the DAO more eligible. Therefore the publicity is one of the main goals of DAOs since it benefits the participants as well as the DAO and creates a more trustful system.

Association/ Community
The concept of DAOs are based on organizations which will eventually help people all around the world to come together and create an association and community in some way. By encouraging people to come together and create a shared vision, DAOs empower individuals and facilitate connections with like-minded people.

Sample Voting Issue 1:
How would you vote?
Against

What amendments would you make to the proposal if any?
The proposal should limit the centralized authority of Flipside by proportioning the amounts that are going to be transferred to Flipside as well as expanding the seats on the allocations and focus on checking the overall steps to make sure to not give in too much authority into one centralized unit.

How would you approach the tradeoff between centralization of authority and the ability to get things done?
Considering the ability to get things done for being more important than decentralization is against the very first objective of the DAOs. DAOs, as it mentions on its name, are Decentralized Autonomous Organizations which means their primary focus is on being decentralized. Getting things done is also remarkably important however in order for it to be done properly, decentralization should be secured primarily. Even though at the end, Uniswap ended up attracting new users, the way it was done is against the idea of decentralization and it was done for Uniswap’s own profit. Considering that it was on behalf of Uniswap it also contradicts the idea that a DAOs main objective should be the diversity of opinions as well as decisions and the participants of the organization, not a small group of people as the authority. Overall, even though attracting new users are important, the proposal gives Flipside crypto too much control over the allocation of UNI and oversight of the program thus will eventually lead up to the system being centralized which in fact, contradicts with the main objectives of DAOs.

Sample Voting Issue 2:
Outside the flipping of the vote, how would you choose to handle this situation?
Split Reimbursement

The logic of reimbursement is based on trust and value. Those companies that guarantee reimbursement in situations like getting hacked, make the people who choose them feel valued and safe to trust the company no matter what since they know that they will end up with a reimbursement.

Even though it seems ethically acceptable for the companies to reimburse those affected in a situation where the company gets hacked, there is an opposition to that idea. Always expecting a refund from all the actions individuals take is not possible when it comes to blockchain. Because blockchain in general has never been something that excluded all the risks. By taking an action whether it is trading, delegating, staking etc. you are also accepting the risks beforehand including the possibility of being hacked.

However, there is another criterion to consider before deciding on the reimbursement and it is the precautions that have been taken beforehand by the company. If the company did not come up with significant security precautions and is not safe enough, then the company itself is also responsible for the money that was taken down from the people. Which will also be an opposing idea on the argument before. The company itself is not separated from the result of being hacked and many people losing money. Just like individuals, companies are also responsible for anticipating possible risks, the company is also responsible to take the necessary actions for those possible upcoming situations. This leads to the idea of split reimbursement. Reimbursement itself is a trust-providing act just as mentioned above. Nevertheless, in a situation where a company gets hacked and people become affected by that, the best possible decision to make is to give split reimbursement to the parties.

Languages We speak and write: English, Turkish as native or bilingual proficiency

Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:
Since we closely follow the developments in decentralized protocols on blockchains, we can understand what is beneficial for the users. We want to help users who cannot follow these processes but have voting power to use this power correctly. And of course, since we know that our main focus is on the same page, we want to contribute to the decentralization of Arbitrum.

Unlike other delegates, ITU Blockchain is located in Turkey, the country where Europe and Asia meet. This us the advantage of providing different perspectives from different cultures and natives, which will eventually benefit the decentralization of the DAOs. We have also noticed that most of the delegates so far are from the American region. Both ITU Blockchain being the delegate and the holders/stakers choosing us as the delegate will support the diversity of ideas.

To further promote decentralization and association, an authorized team from our community will regularly follow the Arbitrum governance forums and inform the rest of the community (who are approximately 2500 members) when voting is required. Once we’re accepted into the delegation, we’ll hold small meetings on governance voting to get our community’s opinions. Ultimately, we will cast our vote according to the collective decision of the community.

To sum up, We think that a decentralized protocol will come to a much better point by being managed with the opinions and suggestions of different communities. Since ITU Blockchain comes from both Europe and Asia, unlike other delegates, different perspectives will be put together and these perspectives will develop Arbitrum.