Voting Actions December 8th - 12th
Proposal: [BIP-892] Distribution of Rescued Funds from Balancer v2 November 3rd 2025 Attacks
Vote: Yes, let’s do it.
Reasoning: We support BIP-892 as it operationalises the intent of BIP-726 by establishing a clear, compliant, and non-retainable whitehat reward framework while ensuring LPs are reimbursed on a per-pool, per-network, non-socialised basis. Paying bounties in-kind (10% of the rescued token, capped at $1M, non-retainable) eliminates pricing volatility, simplifies multi-network settlements, and preserves accounting clarity for the DAO. Excluding the internal Certora-coordinated rescue from Safe Harbor bounties is correct, as it maintains the agreement’s original purpose—incentivizing external whitehats, not compensating existing service relationships.
The pro-rata BPT snapshot methodology and Payment-in-Kind LP reimbursement protect against socialised losses and align distribution with verifiable ownership before exploit execution. The proposed 180-day claim window and dormant-asset follow-up process strike a reasonable balance between user agency, process fairness, and governance accountability.
Proposal: [BIP-893] Reconfigure the Protocol Swap Fee for the ReCLAMM Pool Type
Vote: Yes, let’s do it.
Reasoning: We support this proposal because the current 50% protocol swap-fee retention is demonstrably impairing the economics of ReCLAMM pools, creating excessive drag on LP positions, particularly in volatile pairs, and validated simulations and live-pool data both indicate that fee extraction at this level can approach unsustainable annualized costs, undermining liquidity incentives and the long-term viability of the pool type. Reducing the protocol swap fee to a more balanced 25%—a data-backed yet cautious adjustment—directly addresses this misalignment, improves LP profitability, preserves a sustainable protocol-fee stream, and enables a healthier feedback loop between liquidity provision and pool growth, while ongoing monitoring post-implementation ensures governance retains flexibility to recalibrate if needed.
Proposal: [BIP-894] Kill Stream Gauges
Vote: Yes, let’s do it.
Reasoning: We support this proposal because the Stream Finance incident has left the underlying assets depegged and illiquid, and recent data shows the affected gauges direct emissions to pools with no productive use or trading volume. Killing these Stream gauges is a necessary governance step to stop incentive misallocation and preserve the integrity of the DAO’s emissions framework.
Proposal: [BIP-895] QuantAMM Retroactive Fee Allocation
Vote: Yes, let’s do it.
Reasoning: We support this proposal because it corrects a clear fee-routing error under an already-approved agreement (BIP-871), ensuring QuantAMM contributors receive the fees they were entitled to while maintaining fairness for veBAL holders through a transparent, one-time adjustment in the next distribution, without requiring clawbacks or setting a harmful precedent.