# Pol Lanski Delegate Thread

**URL:** <https://research.lido.fi/t/pol-lanski-delegate-thread/8155>\
**Category:** Delegate Platform\
**Created:** [August 19, 2024, 2:20pm UTC](https://research.lido.fi/t/pol-lanski-delegate-thread/8155 "2024-08-19T14:20:55Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 32

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Lanski](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex013/user_avatar/research.lido.fi/lanski/32/4846_2.png) [@Lanski](https://research.lido.fi/u/Lanski)\
**Post date:** [June 17, 2026, 4:09pm UTC](https://research.lido.fi/t/pol-lanski-delegate-thread/8155/32 "2026-06-17T16:09:06Z")

</div>

In the middle of Berlin Blockchain Week, I am dying to step back form the conference bustle to vote!

## [Galaxy Node Operator Infrastructure Update](https://snapshot.box/#/s:lido-snapshot.eth/proposal/0x644ddd8079f1f802f3da16b11556412cec4f753a1b942fa8456c631a265a4083)

Forum post [here](https://research.lido.fi/t/dao-review-request-galaxy-infrastructure-update/11399)

### Vote: For

### Rationale:

Operational change, reviewed by the right team, clean recommendation. Not contentious.  
I appreciate Galaxy sharing their infrastructure setup with such detail. It’s good to see how others do it 🤝

* * *

## [Revoke Canonical Status of (w)stETH Bridge Endpoints on Selected Chains and Authorize NEC for Revocations](https://snapshot.box/#/s:lido-snapshot.eth/proposal/0x09880de4739dcef13c4aa5605f1dca23556fc7495d09ecc84561a10f26a59b5c)

Forum post [here](https://research.lido.fi/t/revoke-canonical-status-of-w-steth-bridge-endpoints-on-selected-chains-and-authorize-nec-for-revocations/11592)

### Vote: For

### Rationale:

Ok, I admit I had to research what does the “canonical” status entitle. To be fair, it doesn’t mean much. It means “this is the bridge endpoint Lido DAO officially stands behind for this chain.” It signals to users and integrators that Lido actively monitors, supports, and vouches for that deployment. You can still bridge from somewhere else, and even after losing the “canonical” status, you can still bridge from here… so what does this vote mean?

It means that Lido stops wasting resources monitoring chains with no future for stETH. Users can still transact, bridge, etc. No impact for users, relief for DAO contributors.

* * *

## [Wind Down Simple DVT Module Regular Clusters](https://snapshot.box/#/s:lido-snapshot.eth/proposal/0x6ab9651fba999ba29ba780fe61d68cc23e7aeb83c841181c5c1933dec9197f37)

Forum post [here](https://research.lido.fi/t/proposal-wind-down-the-simple-dvt-module-regular-clusters/11571)

### Vote: For

### Rationale:

Oh my god, has SDVTM caused joy and grief. I am participating (via Dappnode), and I have seen how heavy the coordination effort from Lido contributors has been (@KimonSh 👀 ). I am sad to see this large-scale decentralized coordination effort wind down, but it has demonstrated that it is possible to deploy decentralized DVT clusters effectively, and it’s time to pass the torch to the clusters themselves by turning to IDVTC.

The grants are a nice gesture \<3.

* * *

## [Lido Labs Board Update: Appointment of Nemo as Director](https://snapshot.box/#/s:lido-snapshot.eth/proposal/0x3e74af3eb9119c60616c93d1ecccc3bcbd1af27e3895f2e354217872ae116e76)

Forum post [here](https://research.lido.fi/t/lido-labs-proposes-nemo-as-a-new-director/11624)

### Vote: For

### Rationale:

I am heartbroken. Konstantin is stepping down from the Lido Labs board! He’s truly one of the OGs and I hope I can see him again in front of a foosball table and try to beat him again 😏 .  
That said, Nemo is a worthy replacement. All the best in this endeavour, @Nemo (or is it @ncerovac ?). I just need to test your foosball skills now for a full endorsement.

* * *

## [LIP-33: CMv2 and CSMv3 Architecture, Key Parameters, Rollout Plan](https://snapshot.box/#/s:lido-snapshot.eth/proposal/0x7b07bc31f0b38b69a117473031bc126becc70b9fa37246b53d9fe5a841c814f5)

Forum post [here](https://research.lido.fi/t/future-of-the-curated-module-cmv2-landscape/10929)

### Vote: For

### Rationale:

One thing that doesn’t cease to amaze me is how consistent the CSM increase has been. Regardless, web3 defies physics and instead of increasing entropy over time, it becomes more centralized, and despite the good intentions of the CSM (and the measures to identify Individuals and reward them better than large organisations), the 15% expected might be captured by other than home stakers… but hey, it IS better than the Curated module! Tremendous job by @dgusakov .

* * *

## [LIP-35: Staking Router v3 Architecture and Key Parameters](https://snapshot.box/#/s:lido-snapshot.eth/proposal/0x8fdec5d2cb70f8a266c4f5a269051fcfa985fab0f66cbe747702719d7433f606)

Forum post [here](https://research.lido.fi/t/staking-router-v3-design-implementation-proposal-lip-35/11621)

### Vote: For

### Rationale:

This is the base layer LIP-33 sits on top of. SRv3 moves Lido Core from validator-count-based accounting to balance-based accounting.

Four audit firms (Certora, Statemind, MixBytes, Composable Security) with final reports before the onchain vote.

* * *

## [On-chain Vote #202: CircuitBreaker Activation, LOL Limit, Pier Two Rename, Chorus One Deactivation](https://dao.lido.fi/vote/202)

### Vote: Yes

### Rationale:

Standard execution bundle.

Chorus One deactivation is the only item here that wasn’t a prior Snapshot, but it was on-chain:

> [@Chorus One Joins Bitwise](https://research.lido.fi/t/chorus-one-joins-bitwise/11250/8):
>
> The **[Dual Governance Proposal #9](https://dao.lido.fi/dg/proposals/9)**, submitted through [on-chain vote #199](https://dao.lido.fi/vote/199), has been executed. **Node Operator Chorus One soft target validators limit has been set to 0.**

The context is that Chorus One was acquired by Bitwise, which already operates Attestant in the Curated Set. Lido’s rules prohibit one entity from operating multiple Curated Set operators, so Chorus One voluntarily requested deactivation.

And that’s June for y’all.

---

_[View the full topic](https://research.lido.fi/t/pol-lanski-delegate-thread/8155)._