My name is GozmanGonzalez , My background is a mix of law, DAO governance, and community building. I’ve worked across different Web3 organizations, seeing firsthand how protocols succeed when their communities are empowered, and how they stumble when governance is left in the shadows.
I want to bring that experience here, to make sure RARI decisions are made with both care and accountability.
Core Values:
Transparency — I’ll make my reasoning clear, so the community always knows where I stand.
Consistency — showing up for all decisions, not just the big or popular ones.
Security-first thinking — balancing innovation with protecting the protocol from risks.
Community trust — remembering that being a delegate isn’t about power, it’s about responsibility.
Goals:
Strengthen RARI’s governance model as it transitions to broader decentralization.
Encourage wider community participation, so governance isn’t just left to a few voices.
Keep security front and centre, ensuring that RARI remains resilient against governance or protocol attacks.
Disclosures/Conflicts of Interest:
I do not serve as a delegate for any other DAOs. However, I do participate in governance in other DAOs, including ArbitrumDAO and Scroll DAO.
I will fully comply with the RARI DAO Code of Conduct 1, and if a conflict of interest arises, I will abstain from voting and fully disclose the details on the forums.
Rationale
I’m voting for because the Quest rewards were promised and should be delivered. It’s a simple matter of keeping trust with early supporters. The small extra for the POAP raffle is fair and shows we value everyone who took part.
I am voting For because this proposal balances expertise and decentralization by combining three appointed and two elected Security Council seats. It strengthens accountability to the DAO, secures the protocol against governance risks, and keeps costs sustainable at 60,000 RARI annually.
Rationale: I’m voting for this because it follows through on what the DAO already agreed to, but in a more careful way. Phase 2 keeps the promise made to stakers while reducing rewards so we don’t overspend. I also like that it clearly pauses the program after this phase, instead of continuing on autopilot. That pause gives the DAO time to look at what actually worked, what didn’t, and how staking can better support real governance participation going forward.
Rationale: I’m voting for this because it keeps the treasury exposed to ETH while earning some yield instead of leaving funds unused. The scope is narrow and clearly defined, which reduces risk.
There’s no token swap or hidden expansion of authority.
Overall, it’s a practical and careful treasury move.
