5 ETH leveraged $6.5 million in voting rights, and the Arbitrum DAO governance controversy continues to ferment. In early April, ArbitrumDAO @ Arbitrumdao'gov was conducting elections for members of the Oversight and Transparency Committee (OAT), and a controversial "voting rights purchase" of only 5 ETH sparked controversy. User hitmonlee.eth obtained 19.3 million ARB voting rights (worth $6.5 million) at a low price through the platform LobbFi, and voted all of them for candidate Joseph Schiarizzi to help him win the election. This incident highlights the structural fragility of the "one coin, one vote" governance model and exposes the previously hidden mechanism of the "voting market". The voting rights leasing mechanism of LobbyFi essentially allows capital to manipulate DAO decisions at a very low cost in the short term. Although the platform claims to have a transparent mechanism, this move still sparked discussions on the legitimacy and governance fairness of DAOs. Opinions within the community are divided: some believe that such behavior should be prohibited, while others advocate allowing the market to regulate spontaneously and emphasize that traceability is at least safer than private transactions. Should DAOs intervene in the 'voting market'? Becoming an unresolved problem. In addition, the potential annual income of this position exceeds 66 ETH, while the acquisition threshold only requires 5 ETH, and the huge arbitrage space also strengthens the motivation for governance manipulation. After the incident, the Arbitrarum Foundation initiated a discussion proposal and has not yet proposed any mandatory measures. This controversy has also raised regulatory concerns. The SEC and CFTC have increasingly focused on DAO governance. Cases such as Build Finance DAO and Beanstalk have already warned of the risk of governance being compromised. How to establish a governance moat between freedom and control is the problem that DAO must solve in the next stage. The Pandora's Box of DAO is quietly being opened.