Proposal: GIP-134
Vote: For
Reasoning: As described in our detailed comment, we actively reviewed this proposal and discussed with the Gardens team. We’re strongly in favour of this as an experiment with a smaller-scale solution to the issues with had with larger-scale funding initiatives. We believe that Gardens can empower smaller Gnosis contributors and unblock funding for minor contributions. If successful, we’d proactively encourage routine allocations to Gardens ecosystem funds to encourage builders to bring proposals to Gnosis.
Proposal: GIP-132
Vote: For
Reasoning: We strongly believe in the importance of incentivising prompt and clear disclosure of bugs. Ideally this would be dealt with by a formal bug bounty program, so that recipients do not fear an outcome where DAO governance declines to payout. That said, this seems like a clear and valuable bug disclosure that deserves the compensation proposed.
Proposal: GIP-136
Vote: Against
Reasoning: We gave feedback that this proposal was confusingly worded, suggesting a one-year commitment when it is in fact for two years. We’re surprised to see that - though some changes have been made, this proposal has gone to Snapshot still in a confused state. It refers to a two-year commitment throughout, but twice includes the dates of July 2025 to June 2026. The budget section at the end also asks for only a "Baseline ask: 300,000€ (350,000 USD) for the 12‑month period (06/2025–06/2026).", and does not refer at all to the cost of the second year. We will be willing to consider and support this proposal, but it must be amended to clearly and properly state the full value requested over the two-year time period.
Edit: We also note and fully agree with the concerns raised by @mrtdlgc in relation to the majority rejection of the forum poll. The move to Snapshot is somewhat premature, and we also prefer to see the Governance Process followed wherever reasonably possible.
Proposal: GIP-138
Vote: For
Reasoning: We were consulted and gave feedback on this proposal at any early stage, and were pleased to see our changes adopted, as outlined in our forum comment. Though service is aimed at a relatively small userbase of validators, we see that the value and easy-of-access delivered to those validators is a significant help in making Gnosis Chain an attractive choice for participation as a validator. We also approve of the payment mechanism through GNO staking rewards, which we feel aligns strongly with the spirit of the proposal and the DAO’s own interests.