Name EzR3aL

** Wallet Address or ENS: ezr3al.eth or 0x8659D0BB123Da6D16D9394C7838BA286c2207d0E

Tally Profile URL ezr3al.eth’s Delegate Profile (tally.xyz)

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: DAOs are a great way to push projects further without the burden of being a registered company. My goal for the ArbitrumDAO is a great collaboration between other DAOs like Aave, and to setup a fixed budget plan for the ArbitrumDAO, as I think currently the DAO spendings are too high and aren’t tracked properly.

Sample Voting Issue 1: Issue Overview

• Uniswap planned to use Flipside to attract new users to Uniswap through bounties. Although the program outline and funding was fine, the proposal was contentious because it gave Flipside crypto too much control over allocating UNI to bounties and oversight of the entire program.
• For instance, Flipside had 3/7 seats on the allocation committee and 1/3 seats on the Oversight committee. There was also concern since none of the other analytics service providers were involved in the proposal.
• This proposal flew under the radar but at the 11th hour got very heated. Large votes from university clubs supported the proposal since they would get a seat on the allocation committee. However, Dune and Leshner spoke up about the issue because of the centralization of power and favor of one service provider.

Prompts to Answer:

1. How would you vote? Against
2. What amendments would you make to the proposal if any? I would have suggested to include other analytic service provider, to reduce centralized power.
3. How would you approach the tradeoff between centralization of authority and the ability to get things done? Setting up a team/commitee out of different member of analytic SP would probably solve the problem and get things done and it would make sure there is no centralisation.

Sample Voting Issue 2: Issue Overview: Overview Link 1 Overview Link 2

FEI RARI Hack Reimbursement: In April 2022 Rari was hacked for 80M, a vote was passed to reimburse those affected. Then in May 2022 another vote to refund the Rari hacked was brought forward this time it was not passed.

Prompts to Answer:

Outside the flipping of the vote, how would you choose to handle this situation? i.e should parties be reimbursed for an exploit or not? (Please choose one of the below options and then elaborate upon your reasoning)

1. Split Reimbursement It depends on what caused the hack. If it was a bug by design, straight from the beginning it only makes sense to make user whole. If it was implemented by a third party it should be an effort by both teams. Its very important to involve the right SP to analyze the situation and make right decisions. But to satisfy user there should be at least a quick and small solution to show dedication to the user that its being worked on.

Languages I speak and write: german, english

Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest: Diversity of opinions is critical to making progress and determining the future direction of the Arbitrum ecosystem. We recognize and celebrate the fact that delegates will have diverse views and we both encourage and anticipate good-faith debates in the governance process. That being said, it’s critical that all featured delegates are operating with Arbitrum’s best interest in mind, so please affirm that you don’t have any conflicts of interest that would prevent you from using your best judgement to operate in the best interests of advancing the Arbitrum ecosystem.