The following reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @kaereste, @Sinkas, and @Manugotsuka, and it’s based on their combined research, fact-checking, and ideation.
We are voting FOR the proposal.
Protocol security is of paramount importance, and subsidising the cost of security audits is a straightforward step the DAO can take to help with that. The reimbursement aspect, where the DAO only reimburses for an audit after it has been carried out and paid, makes us more comfortable, as it will help mitigate pointless spending with the development team(s) carrying the risk, as pointed out by @bendob.
It also makes sense to introduce a retroactive reimbursement for the audits of previous ZIPs. When our researchers reviewed the proposals on our behalf before we voted for them, especially the gateway one, they made a point about how extensive and complicated the upgrades were. Although we reviewed the code ourselves, we were comfortable knowing they were professionally audited. If there’s anything we shouldn’t be cheap with as a DAO, then that is protocol security.
We have followed the conversation and the points raised by @Gauthier, but we do not see them as reasons to vote against the proposal.