The Foundation sees AIP-1 not as a grant "request," but as a request for community "approval."

AIP-1 提案目前尚未获得批准，但 Arbitrum 基金会已经事先创建了一个地址名为「Arbitrum DAO Treasury2」的多重签名钱包，并且收到近 7 亿枚 ARB Token ，尽管 Arbitrum 基金会的一位代表称该地址是 Administrative Budget Wallet，但这个说辞并没有被社区接受。

In fact, the AIP-1 proposal is making the Arbitrum community feel "grumpy" for three main reasons:

1、对高达 7.5 亿枚 ARB Token 捐款没有实质投票权

The community found that Arbitrum Foundation's seemingly transparent proposal actually excluded grant allocation from on-chain governance. ARB holders could not decide who or how Arbitrum Foundation allocated nearly $1 billion of funds. Because the Arbitrum Foundation does not need to place its grant allocation in "full chain governance."

2. There are no safety and supervision measures

On April 2, Patrick McCorry, an Arbitrum Foundation employee, posted that the Arbitrum Ecosystem's first community vote on everything from agreement governance to billions of dollars was an "approval" rather than a "request," a proposal to inform the community of all decisions made in advance.

3, Arbitrum Foundation is controlled by three people

The Arbitrum community found that the entity that really determines who gets a grant is a foundation with only three directors, who are: Campbell Law, Edward Noyons and Ani Banerjee, co-founder of Provenance, a digital asset compliance firm Edward Noyons currently serves on the board of directors of DAO consulting firm Marfire, while Ani Banerjee's background is unclear.

Analysis of AIP-1 proposal problem

自 ARB 空投以来，Arbitrum 基金会一些举措引起了 DAO 研究人员和 ARB Token 持有者的质疑，根据 Arbitrum 基金会文件，42.78 亿枚 ARB Token 将分配给 Arbitrum DAO 金库，然而根据 AIP-1 提案显示，只有 3,527,046,079 枚 ARB Token 被转移到 DAO 金库.

更重要的是，AIP-1 意味着当前社区治理状态和透明度的倒退，据称 ArbitrumDAO 将对资金库拥有直接的链上治理权，因此社区无法获悉 7.5 亿枚 ARB Token 被取出并转移到不受监督的「特别拨款」 Token 分配原因。根据 Arbitrum 基金会的文档，42.78 亿枚 ARB Token 本应分配给 Arbitrum DAO 金库，但 AIP-1 中只有 3,527,046,079 枚 ARB Token 被转移到 DAO 金库，这个单独的钱包将由 Arbitrum 基金会控制，所以认为这次投票需要慎重考虑。

Originally the DAO vault address 0 xf3fc178157fb3c87548baa86f9d24ba38e649b58, but now is 0 xc24e24383120669512a336fb3b5b19afb4cc2a56.

In fact, Arbitrum has previously stated exactly what a budget wallet is for:

1. Provide special grants

2. Compensate the total setup cost of the applicable service provider

3. Pay the ongoing administrative and operating costs of the Arbitrum Foundation

It is widely believed in the Arbitrum community that Offchain Labs has pre-emptively separated the Administrative Budget Wallet, so without further clarity on the grant process, how funds are held, and how they are monitored, Hasty passage of AIP-1 is bound to raise subsequent questions, such as:

1. Who is the signatory of the designated administrative budget wallet? (Are only three Arbitrum Foundation directors allowed to sign?)

2、为什么这 7.5 亿枚 ARB 倒闭能从金库中取出？（这 7.5 亿 Token 本应属于金库的一部分，但现在似乎处于三位董事中心化控制之下？）

3, even if there are multiple signatures, if malicious actors get access, it will bring huge security risks to Arbitrum.

Follow-up tracking

截至目前，包括 BlockworksResearch 和 Arbitrum 生态最大治理代表 TreasureDAO 均已表示反对 AIP-1 提案，或许是迫于社区压力，Arbitrum 在官推澄清基金会没有出售 5000 万枚 ARB Token ，其中 4000 万枚被作为贷款分配给金融市场中参与者，剩下的 1000 万则被兑换成法定货币并用于运营成本。与此同时，AIP-1 投票也出现翻转，从最初 81.7% 的赞成票变成了现在 82.56% 的反对票。

不仅如此，Arbitrum 基金会还宣布拟对 7.5 亿枚 ARB Token 的分配进行独立投票，并且还会把 AIP-1 提案分解为一系列单独的提案投票，柄为「生态系统发展基金」提供提供有关如何使用资金的背景信息和一份于基金会预算的「透明度报告」。

AIP-1 提案将会在 4 月 4 日结束投票，Arbitrum 基金会能否如愿「获取」这 7.5 亿枚 ARB Token ，让我们拭目以待。

Original link