Name: WOOFi (Organization)

Wallet Address: 0x0a9eeddaa65546ad35d3f0ac9e6f09575e4c9297

Tally: Profile URL

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

• DeFi development on Arbitrum
• Improving Governance Participation

Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:

• Fund innovation and the public good using the Arbitrum tech
• Distribute the governance power in the hands of stakeholders crucial to the ecosystem growth
• Uphold Arbitrum’s ethos as an open-source, decentralized and censorship-resistant platform to scale Ethereum and foster borderless dApps for the next billion users

Sample Voting Issue 1 - UniSwap/Flipside Bounty

1. Against

2. To ensure fairness, an open tender should be put out so that any organization can apply it to ensure competitiveness and fairness. There should be no more than one seat per analytics vendor on the allocation committee, and at least two seats should be reserved for independent personnel. Additionally, Flipside should not have a seat on the oversight committee. Furthermore, to avoid relying on a single entity to safeguard the assets, a decentralized Uniswap v3 LP position management solution (e.g. Arrakis Finance) should be implemented.

3. To strike a balance between efficiency and decentralization in DAO governance, a top-down approach is necessary to distribute the decision-making power. This can be achieved through the following steps:

• Establish special workforces in sectors that matter the most to the DAO.
• Select subject matter experts to run the workforce within the limitations set by the DAO, including budget and individual allocation size.
• Leave decisions on matters outside of the limitations to be decided at the DAO level, and provide the option for the DAO to replace the workforce leads if enough consensus is reached.

Sample Voting Issue 2 - FEI RARI Hack Reimbursement

3. Split Reimbursement

First and foremost, governance decisions are final unless new material information comes to light, in which case a new proposal can be made regarding the same decision

In an ideal world, full reimbursement is the gold standard whilst also allowing the protocol to continue running. However, the FEI RARI hack was so large that a full reimbursement essentially means that the project can’t continue. Given FEI RARI’s great product-market fit, I would suggest a split reimbursement to keep the project running and position it for potential hypergrowth in the next cycle to make victims more than whole.

The split reimbursement mechanism compensates users in part with liquid assets held in the protocol’s treasury and in part with vested governance or debt tokens. Additionally, the team’s allocated tokens should be locked up and only vested if certain milestones, such as making victims whole, are met. This solution keeps the operation running, motivates the team to keep building, and creates a vested interest for both the team and users in the project’s success. It potentially gives more upside to the users.