A similar situation happened recently, where a Sushiswap trader lost money by authorizing a bad transaction and then approached LidoDAO about it (Thread 1, Thread 2.) LidoDAO did not vote to send money to the trader and should do the same in this one.
Fact is, the funds in the EL rewards vault don’t belong to LidoDAO but to stakers, and the DAO has no control over them. Acting as an arbitrator between third parties who lost money to MEV and stakers would be highly problematic for Lido for three reasons:
- An MEV arbitration policy opens a significant attack surface on Lido.
- Lido is neutral middleware.
- Lido should minimize the role of governance.
For the full arguments, please read the threads linked above.
I understand that you didn’t mean to send your funds to the wrong address, and I am very sympathetic to this request on a human level. However, the DAO doesn’t and cannot think and operate at the level of individual humans but in units of broad policies that treat all Ethereum users equally. If users could appeal any transaction they regret, almost every block would get appealed later, and being a validator would be super complicated. That would completely erode the neutrality and robustness of Ethereum’s base layer.