Pol Lanski Delegate Thread

[Lanski]

May votes are here!

LIP-28: Dual Governance — Implementation, Parameters, Committees

Forum post here

Vote: For

Rationale:

Best exemplified with my comment on the thread:

@Lanski

Has been in the making for a long time, it’s complex to implement and yet it’s extremely simple to understand:

• signal your disagreement.
• if enough disagreement is shown (first seal), timelock increases so others can disagree as well.
• if more disagreement is signaled (second seal), timelock is permanent until all those who disagree have exited so they are not affected by the governance change.
• After everyone that disagrees leaves, governance can proceed.

Establishment of the Auxiliary Proposer Mechanisms Committee

Forum post here

Vote: For

Rationale:

The complexity of the sidecars and additional protocols on top of the Ethereum consensus layer and block building process keeps growing, mainly because of MEV and other revenue-generating opportunities.
Lido is one of the biggest entities proposing blocks, insomuch as the growing group of Node Operators that run Lido’s validators are bound to some rules defined by the DAO.
These Node Operators have the opportunity to use tools, connect to block builders and “on-top-of-consensus” protocols, which can increase revenue for the DAO, but could introduce risks.
This is why it’s so important to have the APM, offering guidance on what are the “vetted” tools for N.O. when it comes to the validators from the LidoDAO.

Community Staking Module v2. Architecture and Fee Structure

Forum post here

Vote: For

Rationale:

CSM is “too advantageous” right now - for Node Operators, that is! It offers above-market rewards to Node Operators, which is great to attract more decentralized Node Operators, but it has a fatal flaw: participation to it is permissionless! That means that existing big Node Operators can easily sneak in and enjoy CSM rates without any checks and balances.
I have long been voicing this imbalance and how home stakers get their lunch eaten by professional operators, so I’m very happy to vote “for” onto this proposal to work towards keeping CSM a “Community” module and avoid it being captured by pros.

Vote #187

Vote: Yes

Rationale:

See approved snapshot votes in the links below:

1. Post-Pectra update: adjust Oracle Report Sanity Checker parameters to align with reduced slashing penalty and updated validator churn limits. Items 1-9. Snapshot | Audited by MixBytes
2. Add Easy Track Factories for managing MEV-Boost Relay Allowed List. Items 10-13. Snapshot | Audit and deploy verification by MixBytes
3. Reduce keyRemovalCharge for the Community Staking Module. Items 14-16. Snapshot
4. Increase Easy Track security limit for Liquidity Observation Lab from 2,100 stETH per 3 months to 6,000 stETH per 6 months. Item 17. Snapshot