DAOstar Delegate Thread (rev)

Delegate Platforms
1

Delegate Profile

Name: DAOstar

RSK Address for Delegation: 0x27538B3398880e3F407149ff551827c4962a6801
RNS: daostar.rsk

Contact / Social Links:

About

DAOstar is dedicated to supporting the long-term success and sustainability of the DAO ecosystem by:

  • Developing technical standards, interoperable infrastructure, and public goods
  • Sharing insights on DAOs and decentralized governance through open-source research
  • Creating a communal forum for DAO builders and fostering collective innovation

DAOstar is a 100% public good, nonprofit, no-token project, supported by many amazing projects and organizations, including Optimism, Arbitrum, ENS, Tally, Agora, and the Ethereum Foundation, among others.

Goal / Vision

By partnering with the Rootstock community, we will look to bring our expertise in DAO ecosystem security, grant program management, and governance best practices, in order to create a strong foundation on which the Collective can grow and thrive.

We believe that in order to succeed, DAOs need to maximize their shared impact through collaboration as well as competition. Through our participation as a Rootstock delegate, we hope to promote decentralized governance and open, collaborative research and development for the Bitcoin DeFi ecosystem.

Disclosures

DAOstar is committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity and trust within the Rootstock ecosystem. In cases where a conflict of interest arises, we are dedicated to full transparency and proactive disclosure. We will clearly identify any relevant conflicts within our voting rationales and, where necessary, abstain from voting.

Waiver of Liability

By delegating to DAOstar, you acknowledge and agree that DAOstar will participate on a best-efforts basis and will not be liable for any direct or indirect losses, damages, or claims arising from its participation in the Rootstock Collective, its governance activities, or its protocol/products.

(Updated profile for DAOstar governance team as of 01/15/2026).

1 Like
Rootstock Collective Governance-at-a-Glance 26-01-29
DAOstar Delegate Thread
2

Proposal: [2507 Grant Proposal] Rootstock QuestHub - Milestone 4

Voted: For

Rational: We voted in favor of this proposal, even though we did not participate in the initial discourse for M1-3, we have reviewed all the comments, including the UX/UI user experience issues that have not been optimal. We appreciate the project team’s resolution to work with the delegates regarding their concerns to address and fix these issues. Therefore, we support this proposal and agree that deploying it to the user community to provide their feedback and polish to the UI, is the right course forward.

3

Proposal: [Grant 2601] Recognized Delegate Compensation - December 2025;December 2025 was the 3rd month of payment of our newest program: Recognized Delegate Compensation!

Voted: For

Rational: We voted in support of the December 2025 delegate recognized compensation after careful review of the program from inception which we view as an effective governance tool. The introduction in December of the Joker mechanism and 30-day read window are constructive refinements that balance accountability with openness—measuring recent, meaningful participation without creating rigidity or delegate lock-in.

4

Proposal: [2512 Grant 1] RootStock Global Wallet by Blockscout- Milestone 1
Voted: For

Rationale: We voted FOR this proposal on the basis that:

  • It represents a bounded Milestone 1 step aligned with one of Rootstock’s stated outcome goals for funded projects, boosting adoption.

  • Addressing onboarding and UX friction supports diversification of the user base and responds to a sector-wide constraint to increased transaction activity.

  • The team demonstrated diligence and responsiveness by incorporating constructive delegate feedback, resulting in a refined scope, reduced costs, and clearer milestone structure.

  • Tracking the outcomes of this proposal provides a foundation to measure user acquisition and retention dynamics, including cost per onboarded user, informing the evaluation of future growth initiatives.

5

Proposal: [2601 Grant] SwaptoX Aggregator – Milestone 1;SwaptoX is an existing product that has been live on Base for over four months.

Voted: Against

Rationale: The proposal was advanced to a vote without meeting the KYC requirement in the Grant Guidelines. This lack of basic compliance raised additional concerns around the credibility, track record, and execution capacity of a solo builder- including key-person and continuity risk.

The proposal placed weight on a prior deployment on Base as a proof point, yet provided no supporting data to assess performance or outcomes versus plan. Finally, Milestone 1 insufficiently mitigates the technical and delivery risks perceived.

6

Proposal: [2510] Grant Proposal - Self Sovereign Identity (SSI) sandbox rootstock integration - Milestone 2

Voted: Against

Rational: We voted against this proposal as the inconsistencies from the original proposal in October and the updated M1 deliverables in January for the milestone budget requested (~1K). Secondly, the status updates not posted for three months, leads us to not support this proposal for M1 funding until a detailed proactive communications plan is proposed by the project authors to provide regular updates for a project for this amount.

7

Proposal: [2508 Grant Proposal] All-or-Nothing Crowdfunding with Rootstock - Milestone 3

Voted: For

Rationale: Milestones 1 and 2 establish a solid foundation and set a good precedent for supporting the Milestone 3 request.
The team’s effort to enable follow-up and transparency through an impact dashboard adds credibility.

Milestone 3 funding aligns with the Rootstock Grants Program objectives of promoting adoption.

8

Proposal: [2601 Grant] Loan interest return to boost bitcoin-backed circular economies - Milestone 1

Voted: Against

Rational: We voted against this proposal for several reasons and most importantly, the lack of understanding of the actual direct impact for Rootstock, as well as confusion of the actual grant allocation in the budget for operations, marketing, etc. While we are in general support this pilot project, we are unsure without detailed thoughts from the proposal author of how much impact this project will actually have. While we appreciate the author’s response to the Foundation, the TVL and Revenue generation does not appear completed flushed out. As noted in our comment thread on this proposal, if this proposal for M1 does pass, we will probably vote “against” for future milestones, unless there are more details and clarification provided.

9

Proposal: [Grant 2602] Recognized Delegate Compensation - January 2026

Voted: For

Rationale: Approved delegate compensation for January activity under the Recognized Delegate Compensation Program, based on published activity reports which demonstrate compliance with and alignment to the announced criteria.

10

Proposal: [2601 Grant] SwaptoX Aggregator – Milestone 1

Voted: Against

Rationale: Appreciate the responsiveness; nonetheless, perceived inconsistencies remain and generate concerns which M1 does not mitigate. The grant proposal was initially presented as a deployed solution on Base, later described by the grantee as not yet mature. Solo developer capacity combined with insufficient diligence in the grant request process (KYC mishap requiring vote resubmission and current M1 specificity) raise execution concerns.