Proposal: PIP-75 - Fund request from a user claiming losses due to the March 2024 AugustusV6 vulnerability
Vote: Against
Rationale: I voted Against this proposal, the main argument was given on both discussions initiated by user and @SEEDGov effort to standardise and offer DAO a proper space to debate, my reasoning is as per bellow:
tl;dr
This situation is unfortunate, but the vulnerability was disclosed, mitigated, and compensated through a time-bound DAO program that has long since closed. Reopening refunds 18+ months later would create open-ended liability, governance risk, and potential abuse. Managing approvals is part of DeFi self-custody, and finality is necessary to protect the DAO and its treasury.