web3magnetic Delegate Proposal:

Hello everyone!

Name web3magnetic

Wallet Address or ENS 0x8c580556Fdb1f57853e49F409Ae9b89f7658e7A2

Tally Profile URL Tally | web3magnetic.eth

What area are you most interested in contributing to?

• Public Goods funding
• DeFi development on Arbitrum
• Tooling, Improving protocol decentralization

Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:
The goals of Arbitrum DAO should be geared towards enabling communities and DAOs building on Arbitrum to achieve their goals while providing the best support we can as a DAO. This includes using the DAO’s resources to onboard and support new projects both in terms of technical development as well as onboarding communities, bring greater visibility for existing projects and also create incentives for P2P networks to thrive in a self sustained economy without using centralized entities like exchanges.

Please share your stance on issues that were raised previously, in other communities, as described below:

Sample Voting Issue 1:
Issue Overview

My Answers:

1. How would you vote?
   I would vote FOR the proposal as even though it brings about some degree of centralization of power, ultimately Flipside would help Uniswap achieve the goal of attracting new users. Moreover, the vote doesnt preclude other participants from obtaining their own share of bounties to further the same goal.

2. What amendments would you make to the proposal if any?
   I would propose a similar vote with other parties who are able to bring new users to also access similar bounties.

3. How would you approach the tradeoff between centralization of authority and the ability to get things done?
   In my view, the ability to get things done matters more to early stage DAOs, as often times things get stuck in a loop of repetitive debates for a long time, while the immediate objectives and goals of the proposal take a back seat. While network level decentralization is ultimately very important, in terms of execution there can be some leeway so as enable greater execution.

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

My Answers:

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)

In this situation, there are multiple parties which share the responsibilities for the loss of funds, hence a split re-imbursement will be ideal

Please elaborate on what instances you believe it is right to refund and which are not.
I believe it would be right for a DAO to refund victims of a hack if there is wide consensus that the DAO was responsible in some part for the loss of funds. In many situations, it is not possible for the DAO to refund, however to the extent it is financially possible, and a solution can be achieved that takes into account the considerations of all the parties, all the parties must strive towards bringing such a proposal to fruition.

Languages I speak and write: English

Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:
I am also a delegate for Optimism and Starknet DAOs.
I believe there wont be a conflict of interest in my participation as a delegate in Arbitrum DAO, as it is my view that all the L2 networks have to work together as a united community to advance the overarching goals of DeFi and to bring about Web3 adoption on a much wider scale.
On the contrary, learnings and experiences I have obtained while being a delegate on other L2s can be used to find solutions to complex problems at Arbitrum DAO