Application For Retroactive Proxy Contract Airdrop [For Projects / Apps]

Proposal Discussion
54

Transaction Hash:

0xbc7f2ec6a6502a092fbd0874ae919bd0f4dcd0660f1c3c052bb2855a49eaf521

The Address
0xBf592177E1918ABEC7c9D435157b76f52601DdB4
page allows users to view the source code, transactions, balances, and analytics for the contract address. Users can also interact and make transactions to the contract directly on…

55

Absolutely NOT. Will be voting no and encouraging all others UNISWAP members to vote no as well. You try to bypass Uniswap and now you want UNI tokens? Funny. Not a chance.

57

Submission Instructions For Omitted User Addresses

Hey everyone! Thank you to all the projects who are participating in the proposal. Here’s what I need moving forward to get this proposal to the finish line. I mentioned this previously, but I want to underscore it again: the earliest date users will get their UNI distributed to them is October 17th. As such, there is a much higher premium on rigor than on speed in getting this proposal submitted — though the pulse of the community seems to be largely favorable on this proposal, there are legitimate threads of concern & suspicion that are best addressed through a thoroughly transparent process.

By the end of this week, we will be submitting a proposal to the governance module that will grant ERC20 approval to a merkle drop contract we deploy committing to a set of addresses for allocation.

That set of addresses will be determined through the process described below. If the number of addresses committed to is greater than 5% of the original allocation, we will have a discussion around whether and how we wish to minimize the amount of UNI that will ultimately be pulled from the community treasury (e.g. by forcing users to preemptively claim their allocation before October 17th on the merkle drop contract). Otherwise, we will proceed with allocating UNI to the addresses aligned on in a manner similar to the initial allocation.

List of projects currently included:

  • Dharma
  • DeFi Saver
  • Paraswap (should encompass Monolith users)
  • Nuo
  • 0x API
  • MyEtherWallet
  • Totle
  • Eidoo
  • 1inch.exchange (clarification requested here @deacix)
  • Furucombo
  • Kyber

Projects Who Wish To Be Included Need To Do This :point_down:t3:

Within the next 48 hours…

  • Provide a list of affected addresses from your userbase. Please post a link that resolves to a JSON file containing the addresses — we will be programmatically validating them against the list of contract addresses that have ever been in the call-chain of a Uniswap transaction, and publishing code that allows the community to cross-reference the submitted addresses with those involved in Uniswap transactions.
  • Please be sure to omit addresses from your submission that were already in the initial retroactive airdrop — some of the larger figures quoted for “estimated # of addresses” in the applications likely overlap with the initial Uniswap allocation heavily, given that most of the projects listed were primarily interacted with through a generic web3 wallet like Metamask.
  • Please provide a basic code snippet on Github or Dune Analytics query that demonstrates how you pulled the list of excluded addresses.

We will then compile all of the above into a formalized governance proposal to the broader community. The goal is to have a list of addresses where:

  • It’s programatically clear that they were omitted from the original allocation due to the unintentional proxy contract ommission
  • It’s programatically clear that they were not included in the original allocation
  • The amount of UNI that would need to be allocated to this user segment would be, ideally, less than 5% of the original allocation, and, at worst, 10% of the original allocation.
7 Likes
58

Offering some technical advice: you may benefit from forking the retroactive query repository and requesting each project write a query that identifies all users of their protocol and send a pull request. Then in the final query, union all these project queries and exclude the users contained in the original users query.

I would personally prefer to see all the queries written in this way, merkle tree generated and all immutable contracts deployed (including an immutable merkle root), before submission of any governance proposals.

2 Likes
60

Hey! Half of them are our main aggregation smart contracts and the half is on chain aggregation contracts 1split. We deployed multiple versions over time.

61

What is the name of your project?

Rebalance.to

Please provide a link that demonstrates your project hosted an active interface to Uniswap prior to September 1st

https://app.rebalance.to/

Please provide a link on Etherscan to the proxy contract or contracts through which your users’ actions on Uniswap were routed

How many of your users do you estimate were excluded from the initial airdrop as a result? Please be sure to exclude from this estimate addresses that are already in the initial airdrop merkle root.

about 7

1 Like
63

This topic is temporarily closed for at least 4 hours due to a large number of community flags.

65

This topic was automatically opened after 4 hours.

66

Itamar, since Argent’s trades are executed by Kyber, and Kyber has submitted a separate application for inclusion, I believe Argent’s users would be a sub-set of Kyber’s. Could you confirm if that’s correct?

1 Like
67

What is the name of your project?

DEX.AG

Please provide a link that demonstrates your project hosted an active interface to Uniswap prior to September 1st

Please provide a link on Etherscan to the proxy contract or contracts through which your users’ actions on Uniswap were routed

How many of your users do you estimate were excluded from the initial airdrop as a result? Please be sure to exclude from this estimate addresses that are already in the initial airdrop merkle root.

~2000-3000

2 Likes
68

Two more contract links that weren’t able to be posted due to the two link limit:


69

I’ve contacted Kyber to confirm as they might have included our module as a single user. I’ll update as soon as we have confirmation.

4 Likes
70

Hi everyone, Andrew from Opyn here. Realize we’re a bit behind the deadline and just realized this proposal was active! Would love to still participate if possible. I’m unable post with links, so will leave them as text for now.

What is the name of your project?

Opyn

Please provide a link that demonstrates your project hosted an active interface to Uniswap prior to September 1st

https://medium.com/opyn/providing-insurance-on-opyn-b370e67a709a

Please provide a link on Etherscan to the proxy contract or contracts through which your users’ actions on Uniswap were routed

https://etherscan.io/address/0x5778f2824a114f6115dc74d432685d3336216017
https://etherscan.io/address/0x39246c4f3f6592c974ebc44f80ba6dc69b817c71

How many of your users do you estimate were excluded from the initial airdrop as a result? Please be sure to exclude from this estimate addresses that are already in the initial airdrop merkle root.

~600

Thanks!

3 Likes
71

0x11111254369792b2ca5d084ab5eea397ca8fa48b -> 1inch aggregation proxy contract which interacts with Uniswap
0x111111254b08ceeee8ad6ca827de9952d2a46781 -> 1inch aggregation proxy contract which interacts with Uniswap (old one)
0x111112549cfedf7822eb11fbd8fd485d8a10f93f -> 1inch aggregation proxy contract which interacts with Uniswap (old one)
0x0000000f8eF4be2B7AeD6724e893c1b674B9682D -> 1inch aggregation proxy contract which interacts with Uniswap (old one)
0x000005eDbbc1f258302aDd96B5E20D3442E5DD89 -> 1inch aggregation proxy contract which interacts with Uniswap (old one)
0x0000000053D411bEcDb4A82D8603eDC6d8B8b3Bc -> 1inch aggregation proxy contract which interacts with Uniswap (old one)
0x0000000006ADBd7c01Bc0738cDBFc3932600Ad63 -> 1inch aggregation proxy contract which interacts with Uniswap (old one)
0xE4C577bdEc9cE0F6c54f2f82AED5b1913B71AE2f -> 1inch aggregation proxy contract which interacts with Uniswap (old one)
0x50fda034c0ce7a8f7efdaebda7aa7ca21cc1267e -> 1split on-chain aggregator implementation
0x0a236b41add0073df05eac5fc8505ad745c7859d -> 1split on-chain aggregator implementation
0x2ad672fda8a042c4c78c411bf9d4f1b320aa915a -> 1split on-chain aggregator implementation
0xc586bef4a0992c495cf22e1aeee4e446cecdee0e -> 1split on-chain aggregator implementation
0xdff2aa5689fcbc7f479d8c84ac857563798436dd -> 1split on-chain aggregator implementation

1 Like
72

Hi, Please find below the details of our situation. It’s a bit different than yours. In our case we are a project selling tokens on Uniswap and we locked Liquidity tokens on a Liquidity vault to prevent RUG PULL.

We are EasySwap, please see the answers on the template below.

1 Like
73

What is the name of your project?

Growdrop

Please provide a link that demonstrates your project hosted an active interface to Uniswap prior to September 1st

https://medium.com/growfi/tagged/growdrop

Please provide a link on Etherscan to the proxy contract or contracts through which your users’ actions on Uniswap were routed

https://etherscan.io/address/0x98117E9D8AbCFF8c67B7A848B87B044f8A31D3dF
https://etherscan.io/address/0x38772B4Ff35d679EcD56862418CA4bb4e1918Ece

How many of your users do you estimate were excluded from the initial airdrop as a result? Please be sure to exclude from this estimate addresses that are already in the initial airdrop merkle root.

~10

Please submit your applications within the next 48 hours — we will attempt to approve / request clarification in an expedient manner over the weekend. No need to over-invest in these applications — the burden of proof is directly proportional to the scale of users affected.

Sorry for late request.

74

Nome do projeto Kyber
0x0d1F5c8309e73eEB43d76aA5Ac40c286CcF5a91B

75

Estou perdido. Alguém me ajuda?

76

Nome do projeto: kyber
{
“Txhash”: “0x7c796f5ff9288f546004ee6cc69e2655b9991614510bc975044e3a9cec036a56”,
“Blockno”: 10710797,
“UnixTimestamp”: 1598109324,
“DateTime”: “2020-08-22 15:15:24”,
“From”: “0x0681d8db095565fe8a346fa0277bffde9c0edbbf”,
“To”: “0x85a95921baa094cd17179c7b87851eb5cb701dcb”,
“ContractAddress”: “”,
“Value_IN(ETH)”: 0.72615,
“Value_OUT(ETH)”: 0,
“CurrentValue @ $346.6/Eth”: 251.68359,
“TxnFee(ETH)”: 0.002352,
“TxnFee(USD)”: 0.8152032,
“Historical $Price/Eth”: 395.46,
“Status”: “”,
“ErrCode”: “”
},
{
“Txhash”: “0x159c10f60b8f2778922d94ceda76417f011562cb1e7abf7b74dfc50e42da3a87”,
“Blockno”: 10725670,
“UnixTimestamp”: 1598306026,
“DateTime”: “2020-08-24 21:53:46”,
“From”: “0x85a95921baa094cd17179c7b87851eb5cb701dcb”,
“To”: “0x9aab3f75489902f3a48495025729a0af77d4b11e”,
“ContractAddress”: “”,
“Value_IN(ETH)”: 0,
“Value_OUT(ETH)”: 0.5436125,
“CurrentValue @ $346.6/Eth”: 188.4160925,
“TxnFee(ETH)”: 0.035779916,
“TxnFee(USD)”: 12.4013188856,
“Historical $Price/Eth”: 408.03,
“Status”: “”,
“ErrCode”: “”
},
{
“Txhash”: “0x23e82823da716b4162495b566ccf1725586ceeec6146433d26339538703448dc”,
“Blockno”: 10742596,
“UnixTimestamp”: 1598531401,
“DateTime”: “2020-08-27 12:30:01”,
“From”: “0x85a95921baa094cd17179c7b87851eb5cb701dcb”,
“To”: “0xcab5174d29433d631f70f462709ef2b20e7aa916”,
“ContractAddress”: “”,
“Value_IN(ETH)”: 0,
“Value_OUT(ETH)”: 0.144615584,
“CurrentValue @ $346.6/Eth”: 50.1237614144,
“TxnFee(ETH)”: 0.002142,
“TxnFee(USD)”: 0.7424172,
“Historical $Price/Eth”: 383.18,
“Status”: “”,
“ErrCode”: “”
}
]

77

I’ve verified that a couple of addresses you’ve above will be included in our list.

On another note, we have 30,250 addresses in total, after filtering claimed addresses. The reason why it increased from the initial amount in my previous post is because I wrote a Dune Analytics query to fetch the addresses, which lacked addresses trading through our new Kyber proxy contract (0x9aab3f75489902f3a48495025729a0af77d4b11e).

We have since wrote a custom script to supplement the dune analytics query, fetching the data using a local node.

I believe that a substantial no. of addresses will overlap with some projects as well (Eg. 1inch, Argent etc.) since they have integrated us for the token swaps.

1 Like