Where do you think Lido earn revenue goes? It goes straight into the treasury.
4 Likes
Title: Shapshot Voting Increase Easy Track transfer limits for Liquidity Observation Lab to align with EGG
Decision: Vote FOR
Increasing the limits is a necessary measure, so there is little point in discussing it, but I think that in the future these limits will have to be raised again.
1 Like
Title: Shapshot Voting Should Pier Two continue in the Curated and SDVT sets following the acquisition by Bitmine Immersion Technologies?
Decision: Vote FOR
A standard procedure that has happened before.
The only interesting thing is that such a large fund decided to diversify its business.
1 Like
Title: Shapshot Voting Transition from GateSeals to CircuitBreaker
Decision: Vote SUPPORT
Switching to a single contract is a good solution that will reduce the time spent on servicing and processing requests to suspend contracts, which in theory will reduce costs.
1 Like
Title: Shapshot Voting NEST: Automated LDO Buyback and Liquidity Provisioning
Decision: Vote AGAINST
This proposal was discussed back at the end of last year, and there were numerous arguments for and against it.
I believe these conditions leave tokenholders virtually without any profit.
The $40 million cap suggests the company has no intention of reducing costs and has no intention of doing so. In this case, tokenholders are the last ones to benefit from the project, which shouldn’t be the case.
It also doesn’t take into account previously earned profits, which could have been used for a useful buyback rather than simply hoarded in treasuries.
1 Like
Title: Shapshot Voting Adopt the Node Operator Type Assessment Framework for CMv2
Decision: Vote APPROVE
This is what Laido has been striving for recently—to give advantages to those operators who will generate profit not only for themselves, but for the community or the project.
Now the committee will decide who falls into which group and accordingly assign each group its own profitability (but not within the framework of this proposal).
1 Like
Title: On-chain Vote #201
Decision: Vote YES
All decisions are either requests, or a necessity, or the implementation of what was previously decided
The proposal extends Dual Governance for one year (though it could have been longer).
Consensys changes its address upon request.
Increases the limit for Easy Track to $5 million over six months.
VEBO will receive more frequent reports.
1 Like
Hi
How i can contact u?
Title: Shapshot Voting Galaxy Node Operator Infrastructure Update
Decision: Vote For
It’s good that Galaxy plans to implement this transition during the migration from CMv1 to CMv2, when node operators of curated modules will need to generate new 0x02 validator keys.
I support any changes that are convenient for operators and do not compromise system security.
1 Like
Title: Shapshot Voting Revoke Canonical Status of (w)stETH Bridge Endpoints on Selected Chains and Authorize NEC for Revocations
Decision: Vote APPROVE
I support the exclusion of the 9(w)stETH bridge, as there is no significant deployment of these assets on these networks.
In fact, this has almost no impact. Furthermore, recognizing canonical bridges is more of a marketing ploy than a technical one, and it’s good that NEC will now be handling this.
Title: Shapshot Voting Wind Down Simple DVT Module Regular Clusters
Decision: Vote Support
There were some doubts about the need to spend 65 stETH.
It’s not entirely clear whether it makes sense to rush things and compensate operators for it.
I understand that SDVTM brings Lido approximately 2.9%, while CSM brings in around 6%, but such costs won’t pay off anytime soon.
On the other hand, maintaining various schemes also requires labor.
1 Like
Title: Shapshot Voting Lido Labs Board Update: Appointment of Nemo as Director
Decision: Vote For
It’s a rather strange decision to put this to a vote at the DAO.
I could understand if all elections in all Lido companies were voted on, but that’s not happening.
1 Like
Title: Shapshot Voting LIP-33: CMv2 and CSMv3 Architecture, Key Parameters, Rollout Plan
Decision: Vote For
I support a consistent and smooth transition to the new CMv2 and CSMv3 architecture.
One could say this is a planned transition, as steps have already been taken for these new versions.
I support increasing the percentage of potential stakers on the Permissionless module.
1 Like
Title: Shapshot Voting LIP-35: Staking Router v3 Architecture and Key Parameters
Decision: Vote For
For me, the most important thing is to support new stakers with more than 32 ETHs, which means we need to be able to count the staked ETHs themselves, not the number of validators, which will now differ.
The migration mechanism to CMv2 for large operators is also important.
1 Like
Title: On-chain Vote #202
Decision: Vote YES
All decisions are either requests from node operators, or the implementation of what was previously decided at Snapshot voting.
Since I have previously voted for these decisions, I see no doubt in my decision here either.
Title: Shapshot Voting Adopt the CMv2 Penalty Framework
Decision: Vote For
Until now penalties in the Curated Module were decided case by case with no written rules at all, so any baseline is better than that.
There are no automatic penalties here, each incident is still looked at separately, and an operator who takes downtime to avoid slashing is not punished for it. That is the main thing for me.
The CMC can update thresholds and methodology on its own, but anything bigger still comes back to the DAO.
Title: Shapshot Voting 0x02 CSM: New Permissionless Module Launch
Decision: Vote For
This is the continuation of what was already decided in LIP-33, so for me it is a planned step.
A separate module for 0x02 makes sense, mixing 32 ETH and 2,048 ETH validators in one place would only create problems with deposits and bonds.
The bond looks high, but per 32 ETH of balance it is lower than in 0x01 CSM, and the DAO gets 8%. Good for both sides.
The 20% cap stays with the DAO, the rest of the parameters come back before the Q4 release.
Title: Aragon Voting Activate Staking Router v3, Community Staking Module v3 and Curated Module v2
Decision: Vote For
This is the on-chain part of what LIP-33 and LIP-35 already decided, and I voted for both on Snapshot.
The main thing here is the move from counting validators to counting balances. After Pectra validator sizes stop being equal, and without this change reward distribution starts drifting. The longer it waits, the worse the mismatch gets.
Migration from CMv1 to CMv2 goes through Merkle proofs, so anyone can execute an approved batch and no one is forced to exit. The rollout is phased over several months.
Four audits, testnet checks, no treasury spend. I see no reason to hold this back.
Delegate information (update):
As part of a routine key rotation, I’m moving to a new delegate address.
New address: 0x1778e0C68E13c6730091b576eCe9a1dA05f8488e
Signature confirming the change: Ethereum Verified Signed Message
1 Like
Title: Shapshot Voting Lido Alliance BORG Update: Appointment of Bryce Howarth as a New Director
Decision: Vote For
Swapping one of the two Steakhouse directors for an independent one is a sensible
step for an entity that now carries the GOOSE-3 mandate.
I asked two questions in the thread and got clear answers to both. The board stays at two, which is the minimum the bylaws allow, and a third director will only be appointed if Lido contributors see benefit in it. I would still prefer three, and from more than one firm. At two, any resignation puts the BORG below its own minimum, and both seats sit with service providers.
On remuneration, the BORG’s position is that it is already covered within the EGG. That closes the question, but it does mean the bylaws requirement for community approval of a director’s compensation is satisfied by a budget envelope rather than by a vote on the amount itself. Worth being deliberate about at the next EGG.
1 Like