Arbitrum’s token is down bad. 71% in a year? Ouch. And governance participation is tanking. Accordingly, the DAO is interested in reducing the quorum needed for proposals to pass. From 5% to 4.5%. Sounds simple, right? A quick fix to get people involved? Maybe not. This might just be a Hail Mary play that backfires spectacularly.

Quorum Change: Whale Games Incoming?

Lowering the quorum sounds good on paper. Get more proposals passed, right? Let’s not kid ourselves, this is not some move to benefit the everyday Joe holding a few ARB tokens. This is about the whales. And I track whales. I see what they're doing.

Think about it. By reducing the quorum, it is easier for an opponent with a deep war chest to influence an election. Like lowering the bar in a limbo contest does to all the other contestants, it automatically lowers the barrier for everyone else. It most rewards the guy who’s already farthest down the pecking order!

We’re asking you to consider conferring even more authority to the people who already wield a great deal of it. Is that really what we want? Increased, more diffused power in a system that is meant to be decentralized?

Apathy: The Symptom, Not The Disease

The official reason? To revive participation. Voter apathy isn't the problem. It's a symptom. The biggest problem of all? There’s no incentive for anyone to give a damn. The token price is in the toilet. Why should I bother spending my weekends studying proposals and debating and casting votes at AG in the first place? My ARB fortunes are vaporizing quicker than my hairline!

It’s the same as addressing a dripping faucet by soaking up the water on the kitchen floor. Sure, you're dealing with the water. But all you’re doing is not addressing the source of the leak.

Perhaps the apathy is indicative of the community simply falling out of step with where the DAO is trying to go. Maybe the proposals aren't compelling. Perhaps the DAO is in pursuit of a solution to a problem that isn’t real.

At the moment, the Arbitrum DAO is sitting on a massive heap of reserves. Almost $16 billion collectively across DAOs! Instead of playing around with rules about who gets to vote when, how about applying a bit of that money to, I dunno, encourage turnout? Staking rewards? Bounties for contributing to the ecosystem? Whatever it is, whoever creates it, just do something, do anything that gives people an incentive to really care.

LobbyFi: Compound's Ghost Haunts Arbitrum

Remember what happened with Compound? A $25 million vote manipulation scandal thanks to all of the “LobbyFi” vultures? That is what should be waking Arbitrum up at 3 AM. Lowering the quorum just makes it more likely for that type of thing to come back and pass.

It’s similar to leaving the front door to your house wide open, and just hoping that no one walks in and takes your television. Sure, it might be fine. But are you actually prepared to make that gamble?

The sad truth is that the argument that “we need to do something right away” is nonsense. Making decisions in haste or desperation is almost never a recipe for success. This smells like a short-term solution that might have tragic long-term results.

So, is this a hail Mary play or a smart reboot? Honestly, it feels more like the former. This doesn’t even truly fix the issue. It’s a band-aid solution to a much deeper problem. And it’s making them focus on the quantity of votes rather than the quality of participation.

FeatureCurrent StateProposed ChangePotential Consequence
Quorum Requirement5%4.5%Increased vulnerability to whale manipulation
Voter ParticipationLow (50% decline)Aim: Increased participationRisk: Fails to address root cause of apathy
Token PriceDown 71% in 12 monthsNo direct impactApathy persists due to lack of incentives

Strategic Reset Or Road To Ruin?

Arbitrum needs to address the underlying issues: the lack of incentives, the poor token performance, and the potential for whale manipulation. Lowering the quorum is simply kicking the can down the road. That road would end in a DAO dominated by the largest, most concentrated, and most powerful players. This reality is a far cry from the decentralized utopia we were sold on.

It's time for Arbitrum to take a long, hard look in the mirror and ask itself: What kind of DAO do we really want to be? Because this voting revamp? It's not the answer. It’s a high stakes bet with the odds becoming more and more stacked against us.

It's time for Arbitrum to take a long, hard look in the mirror and ask itself: What kind of DAO do we really want to be? Because this voting revamp? It's not the answer. It's a gamble with odds increasingly stacked against us.