Hey enerow, this is Citizen’s delegate platform, please keep things on topic!
If have any questions, please reach out on Discord or reach out to the dashboard maintainers (laita labs).
1 Like
I delegated voting power to him, so I’m asking my delegate, who is voting “FOR” where distribution could be wrong, he’s representing me.
Hey frens, thanks @0xYtocin for replying but I must agree with my fren @enerow. I’ll check again just to be on the safe side, must admit didn’t think of the overall distribuition just calculated for my address the supposed reward hence I went ahead with FOR. 1+ for things to be diligent about and appreciate @enerow for highlighting 
as soon as I’m at pc will double verify 
1 Like
Checked and onchain data seems to match distribuition. @0xYtocin fren could this be UI issue ? I am double checking things just to be sure but fees claimed for May seem to match distribution logic otherwise if UI is correct I couldn’t see anywhere fees in quantity of approx 55 ETH
1 Like
Please note that the fee distribution is not based on total revenue, but rather on net revenue — that is, after deducting operational expenses such as payments to the service providers supporting the DAO.
2 Likes
Thanks @SEEDGov that seems to make sense
Proposal: Gas distribution for Epoch 31
Vote: For
Rationale:
I have cross-validated data and it checks out, thanks @WakeUpLabs for your efforts and continuous support!
1 Like
Proposal: PIP-65 - Enhancing Predictability in VeloraDAO Governance
Vote: Against
Rationale:
I voted against PIP-65 not because I don’t value predictability but because the formal mechanisms that adds risk which could over-engineer our governance.
In practice, as @0xYtocin suggested an informal agreement among our active delegates backed by clear calendar guidance in our forums would most likely deliver the same outcome without the added complexity or rigid time locks.
Let’s keep it simple and lean on present working principles rather than codifying holiday freezes or extra delays.
Proposal: PIP-66 – Deprecation of the Governance Committee
Vote: For
Rationale:
I’ve voted FOR because retiring GovCo and moving towards service providers and delegates as signers composition saves a good bunch in expenses and sharpens our security model without centralizing power. Incentivising those signer efforts via DIP scoring could be an excellent way to reward onchain diligence and ensure timely, careful transaction validation, however rare it may be. Overall I feel those changes keep Velora lean, trustless and fully optimised, when it comes to PEPs, exactly where we need to be as we scale.
Proposal: Project Miró – Deployment of VLR on BSC
Vote: For
Rationale:
I’m voting FOR this BSC deployment because the team’s clarifications address the key concerns around trader attraction, marketing tactics and pool management.
I particularly appreciate the move to partner with a specialized liquidity manager, while my prefered solution, Arrakis isn’t on BSC today, exploring similarly robust automators will ensure our PoL stays healthy without constant manual rebalancing. I’m confident that this will unlock fresh vertical growth in BSC’s vibrant ecosystem. LFGrow !
Proposal: Rewards distribution for Epoch 32
Vote: For
Rationale: After careful validation using the verification app and IPFS files made available I have voted in favor of this proposal.
Proposal: Gas Refunds distribution for Epoch 32
Vote: For
Rationale I have carried the due diligence and can confirm the gas refund calculations seems right and thank @WakeUpLabs for their continuous efforts in providing all tools for validation.
1 Like
Proposal: Gas Refunds distribution for Epoch 33
Vote: Missed due to PTO
Proposal: Rewards distribution for Epoch 33
Vote: Missed due to PTO
Proposal: PIP-68 - Upgrade VeloraDAO’s Snapshot space to Pro
Vote: For
Rationale:
I’m voting For to preserve split-delegation (core to our delegate model) ahead of Snapshot’s Aug 15 change. The Pro plan keeps our current workflows intact while adding practical upgrades (larger proposal text limit, more strategies, support), with a clear, predictable cost. This seems low-friction, reversible ops decision that avoids any disruption to our governing efforts.
As a minor follow-up, I’d like us to revisit the subscription annually (and explore discounts or alternatives as some delegates suggested).
Proposal: PIP-69 - Velora Treasury Management
Vote: For
Rationale:
I am voting For this proposal as it builds directly on the discussions we’ve already had for a long time and it feels like a must. The DAO has reached a stage where professionalized treasury management is not just useful but necessary and PIP-69 provides that framework and solidifies the idea.
I have already highlighted the importance of entrusting this role to someone with proven expertise, and Avantgarde’s experience makes them no doubt the right fit. The proposal ensures that responsibility remains with the DAO while giving the Treasury Manager the mandate to actively monitor, design and report on treasury strategy. In my view, this strengthens resilience, supports long-term sustainability and keeps decision-making transparent and accountable.
Thanks @Avantgarde for taking on this responsibility !
Proposal: PIP-70 - Velora Contributors Program (VCP) Cycle 2 Renewal
Vote: For
Rationale:
I am voting For this renewal as Cycle 1 has clearly shown the value of structured incentives in strengthening participation, transparency and accountability among delegates.
The refinements introduced in Cycle 2, particularly the clearer split between delegate tiers and Contributor Points, as @SEEDGov confirmed in forum discussions, provide a farer, more predictable framework while still rewarding contributions.
We’ve already discussed how structure and clear expectations lead to smoother and more efficient governance and I believe this proposal takes those lessons forward. While I initially suggested a more gradual introduction of Contributor Points, I am supportive of the clarified design and agree it should complement, rather than replace, governance discipline. The overall approach seems to keeps the program sustainable, inclusive and aligned with Velora’s long-term growth.
Look forward to applications timeframe! Good luck to all delegates participating !
Proposal: Gas Refunds distribution for Epoch 34
Vote: For
Proposal: Rewards distribution for Epoch 34
Vote: For
Rationale: As per previous carried out checks and tools provided by @WakeUpLabs all seems correct hence voted For. Thanks WakeUpLabs frens for continuously grinding to bring stakers their yield !
Proposal : [TEST] Test Proposal – oSnap Base Chain Integration Check
Vote: For
Rationale: Voted in favour to support @WakeUpLabs in validating configs for Base rewards.
1 Like
Proposal: PIP-71 – VeloraDAO Sponsorship of Governance Day 2025 – Buenos Aires
Vote: For – Gold Tier
Rationale:
I believe Governance Day is well aligned with Velora’s trajectory following the rebrand and, as mentioned in my post, the maturity level we have reached in our governance processes. The event provides visibility alongside leading DAOs, a chance to highlight Velora’s innovations and opportunities to capture meaningful connections in the governance ecosystem. While Platinum would offer more exposure, I share the community’s view that treasury spend must remain balanced. The Gold tier strikes the right note while keeping costs moderate. I support this proposal with the caveat that a post-event retrospective report will be key to evaluate outcomes and inform future sponsorship decisions.
Proposal: PIP-72 – Liquidity Funding for Futarchy Experimentation in Velora Governance
Vote: For
Rationale:
As expressed here! This is a well-scoped, low-ish-cost experiment that fits Velora’s ethos of innovation and data-driven governance. Overall it allows the DAO to test futarchy signals in practice and evaluate their value in decision-making with little treasury exposure and clear learning potential for future iterations. I would have loved to see incentives among Delegates for participation to be able to compare outcomes with past snapshot participations but I understand @SEEDGov s logic and will patiently wait for results as market takes shape !!! Hope to see a lot of Yeys and Neys either way would expose utility of those systems!