# CalBlockchain / Blockchain at Berkeley Delegate Platform **URL:** \ **Category:** Delegation Pitch\ **Created:** [March 13, 2025, 5:46am UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378 "2025-03-13T05:46:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![CalBlockchain](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/calblockchain/32/9801_2.png) [@CalBlockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/CalBlockchain)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2025, 5:46am UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/1 "2025-03-13T05:46:53Z")
**Blockchain at Berkeley Delegate Thread** **Key Info** - ENS: calblockchain.eth - Twitter: [https://twitter.com/CalBlockchain](https://twitter.com/CalBlockchain) - Email: governance@blockchain.berkeley.edu - External Website: [https://blockchain.berkeley.edu/](https://blockchain.berkeley.edu/) **Two wallet addresses:** [https://www.tally.xyz/gov/uniswap/delegate/0x7ae109a63ff4dc852e063a673b40bed85d22e585](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/uniswap/delegate/0x7ae109a63ff4dc852e063a673b40bed85d22e585) [https://www.tally.xyz/gov/uniswap/delegate/0x458cEec48586a85fCFEb4A179706656eE321730E](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/uniswap/delegate/0x458cEec48586a85fCFEb4A179706656eE321730E) The first wallet is the PRIMARY wallet to be used for security purposes. We will (rarely) use the second wallet to reach quorum, etc. **Introduction** Blockchain at Berkeley is a student-run organization at UC Berkeley founded in 2014 and focused on blockchain innovation. The major departments in Blockchain at Berkeley are as follows: - Consulting: Building software and performing research to support companies, protocols, and other organizations. Previous clients include Arbitrum, Algorand, LayerZero, Avalanche, PayPal, UNICEF, etc. - Education: Providing blockchain education through student-run courses at UC Berkeley, to over 300,000 students worldwide through our EdX course, DeCal’s (student-taught courses at UC Berkeley), and within the org through white paper reviews and developer bootcamps. - Xcelerator: Launched what’s now the #1 university blockchain accelerator in the US, since 2019. 100+ alumni companies, 450M+ total of follow-on funding secured. - Research/Governance: Voting and building proposals for delegated protocols including Compound, Uniswap, Celo, and Obol. Also run whitepaper circles and initiatives to answer research questions in the space. **Governance Voting Methodology:** The governance department meets in person weekly to discuss updates. Members sign up to the protocols they want to be active on, with a lead being assigned to each. Throughout the week, members voice their opinions about proposals and governance changes in our internal Slack channel. After internal consensus is achieved, we vote on proposals and aim to explain our positioning on the forum. **Voting Priorities:** - Active and Accountable Governance Participation - Technical Contribution and Ecosystem Growth: - Community Engagement and Thought Diversity: **Waiver of Liability** By delegating to Blockchain at Berkeley, you acknowledge that we are not liable for any potential losses or adverse outcomes resulting from our involvement in the governance process. ---
**Author:** ![CalBlockchain](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/calblockchain/32/9801_2.png) [@CalBlockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/CalBlockchain)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2025, 10:08am UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/2 "2025-03-16T10:08:31Z")
# [Temp Check] Saga Uniswap v3 Liquidity Incentives As stated here: [https://gov.uniswap.org/t/rfc-saga-and-uniswap-v3-liquidity-incentives/25309/6?u=calblockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/rfc-saga-and-uniswap-v3-liquidity-incentives/25309/6) We voted YES with the following justification: As this is a snapshot vote, we hope that the final proposal includes many of the disagreements DAO members have brought up. The following risks are valid: 1. A relatively low TVL: Saga protocol activity is too low for incentive consideration 2. Relatively new DEX, 3. Pool selection: 3/5 of the pools are SAGA pools with an asymmetric reward distribution However we believe that: 1. Since “Saga Foundation will contribute 2mm SAGA tokens per month (~$1.0mm USD per month as of Feb 27, 2024) to the Uniswap V3 pools to bootstrap Uniswap liquidity on Saga” is significantly more than the Uni incentives, 2. Saga is focused on setting Uniswap as the core canonical DEX are good reasons to fund this project. While we understand the merit of not funding a low TVL project, as a new project that is prioritizing Uniswap, it would be a good idea to incentivize this early so that Uniswap is the main DEX. We believe to some degree, it is not up to the DAO to determine the legitimacy and future potential of a project like this, but to greedily aim to maximize market share and TVL. ---
**Author:** ![CalBlockchain](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/calblockchain/32/9801_2.png) [@CalBlockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/CalBlockchain)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2025, 12:02am UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/3 "2025-03-17T00:02:13Z")
**Unichain and Uniswap v4 Liquidity Incentives** [https://vote.uniswapfoundation.org/proposals/82](https://vote.uniswapfoundation.org/proposals/82) YES Voting yes on the Unichain and Uniswap v4 Liquidity Incentives proposal means supporting a targeted strategy to rapidly bootstrap liquidity during a critical growth phase. Here are the key reasons: • It kickstarts a migration of significant TVL and trading volume to Uniswap v4 across key chains by offering higher yields to LPs, which helps build a robust liquidity base at launch. • It’s built on a dynamic, data-driven approach—deploying incentives in short 2‑week tranches that can be adjusted in real time based on market conditions. This minimizes risk and maximizes efficient fund use. • The proposal leverages a trusted partner (Gauntlet) and uses transparent tools (like Aera vaults and public dashboards) so that Uniswap Governance retains control and oversight over the incentive funds at every step. • By driving immediate liquidity, the proposal not only supports short‑term volume but also creates the network effects necessary for sustained growth, attracting developers, integrators, and end users to both Uniswap v4 and Unichain. In short, a yes vote endorses a well-calibrated, transparent plan designed to secure Uniswap’s leadership by creating a strong, sustainable liquidity foundation. ---
**Author:** ![CalBlockchain](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/calblockchain/32/9801_2.png) [@CalBlockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/CalBlockchain)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2025, 12:14am UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/4 "2025-03-17T00:14:15Z")
[[Governance Proposal] Uniswap Unleashed](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/governance-proposal-uniswap-unleashed/25251) [https://vote.uniswapfoundation.org/proposals/83](https://vote.uniswapfoundation.org/proposals/83) ABSTAIN We voted to abstain on the Uniswap Unleashed proposal because while we appreciate the ambition behind the initiative, we believe several areas still require further clarification before we can fully commit our support. Specifically, we have concerns regarding the proposal’s expansive scope and the clarity of its performance metrics. The long‑term KPIs and intermediate milestones need to be more clearly defined to ensure that we can objectively measure progress and adjust strategy as needed. Additionally, the substantial funding request spread over multiple years raises questions about resource allocation and accountability. We agree with concerns many delegates have brought up, including: 1. Vague direction on fee sharing and fee switch 2. Unichain ownership and vague direction of DAO legal structure 3. Lump sum has no incremental or milestone-driven unlocks 4. Vague onboarding direction of Core Contributors We believe in the core direction of this proposal and the incentivization of univ4 and hook builders is necessary but its implementation contains some conflicts of interest and vague direction on DAO ownership/responsibility. ---
**Author:** ![CalBlockchain](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/calblockchain/32/9801_2.png) [@CalBlockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/CalBlockchain)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2025, 12:35am UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/5 "2025-04-13T00:35:22Z")
**[RFC] Uniswap Onboarding Package for BOB** **Voting Decision:** YES **Discussion Forum Link:** [https://gov.uniswap.org/t/rfc-uniswap-onboarding-package-for-bob/25436](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/rfc-uniswap-onboarding-package-for-bob/25436) **Off/Onchain Vote Link:** [Link Provided in Governance Vote Thread](https://gov.uniswap.org) **Explanation:** We voted YES on the BOB onboarding package because it supports a strategic initiative that leverages a promising Hybrid Layer 2 focused on Bitcoin DeFi. BOB has demonstrated significant organic traction—with over $247M TVL across its Dapps and $42–43M in Uniswap V3 liquidity—and positions itself as the primary venue for BTC-native volume. The proposal’s design to boost liquidity incentives (including a commitment of $500K matched at 75% by the DAO) helps reinforce Uniswap’s position as the canonical DEX on BOB. This early-stage boost is seen as critical for long-term network growth and for unlocking new BTC use cases on DeFi, thereby expanding Uniswap’s ecosystem influence. * * * **Establish Uniswap v4 Licensing Process** **Voting Decision:** YES **Discussion Forum Link:** [https://gov.uniswap.org/t/establish-uniswap-v4-licensing-process/25443](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/establish-uniswap-v4-licensing-process/25443) **Off/Onchain Vote Link:** [Link Provided in Governance Vote Thread](https://gov.uniswap.org) **Explanation:** Our YES vote on the v4 licensing process proposal reflects our confidence in establishing a strong operational framework for the next phase of Uniswap’s expansion. By creating dedicated ENS subdomains (v4-core-license-grants.uniswap.eth and v4deployments.uniswap.eth) and setting up a process for granting blanket license exemptions, the proposal not only preserves Uniswap’s temporary competitive moat under the Business Source License but also ensures secure and transparent tracking of official v4 deployments. This structured approach enables the DAO—and its partners like the Uniswap Foundation—to manage and accelerate v4 adoption across multiple chains, thereby setting the stage for advanced hook integrations and overall protocol growth before the license eventually transitions to MIT. ---
**Author:** ![CalBlockchain](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/calblockchain/32/9801_2.png) [@CalBlockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/CalBlockchain)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2025, 12:23am UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/6 "2025-04-23T00:23:20Z")
**[RFC] Uniswap Onboarding Package for BOB** **Voting Decision:** YES **Discussion Forum Link:** [https://gov.uniswap.org/t/rfc-uniswap-onboarding-package-for-bob/25436](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/rfc-uniswap-onboarding-package-for-bob/25436) **Off/Onchain Vote Link:** [https://www.tally.xyz/gov/uniswap/proposal/84](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/uniswap/proposal/84) **Explanation:** We voted **YES** on the BOB onboarding package as it reinforces Uniswap’s strategic position as the canonical DEX for Bitcoin-native assets on Layer 2. BOB has demonstrated traction, with over **$247M TVL** and **$43M in Uniswap V3 liquidity** , ranking it 5th among all Uniswap deployments. The proposal requests **$375K in UNI** to support Uniswap pool incentives and infrastructure costs, with BOB committing an additional **$500K in matched incentives** over six months. This liquidity boost targets high-impact BTC-centric pairs and supports deeper adoption of BTC Liquid Staking Tokens (LSTs) on Uniswap. Campaigns like **BOB Fusion** and **BOB Rise** have already driven Uniswap user engagement and TVL growth, with Uniswap receiving the highest reward multipliers in Fusion and a 6–7x return on OP emissions during BOB Rise. We believe this proposal strengthens Uniswap’s leadership in BTC DeFi and ensures it remains the preferred venue for wrapped BTC and Bitcoin-native assets. ---
**Author:** ![CalBlockchain](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/calblockchain/32/9801_2.png) [@CalBlockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/CalBlockchain)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2025, 7:10am UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/7 "2025-04-24T07:10:05Z")
**Approved Budgets Rebalancing (S4)** **Voting Decision:** YES **Discussion Forum Link** : [https://gov.uniswap.org/t/uniswap-accountability-committee-uac-season-3-report/25467/2](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/uniswap-accountability-committee-uac-season-3-report/25467/2) **Off/Onchain Vote Link** : [https://snapshot.box/#/s:uniswapgovernance.eth/proposal/0xaf7a6894af35b3a71cd7222d4a17ef2ef85ff8ffb3f02be8c7e6e9dec548f9bf](https://snapshot.box/#/s:uniswapgovernance.eth/proposal/0xaf7a6894af35b3a71cd7222d4a17ef2ef85ff8ffb3f02be8c7e6e9dec548f9bf)\* **Explanation** : We are voting yes as this rebalance ensures that the DAO can meet prior commitments to key programs like Tally, UEII, delegate compensation, and the Forse Grant, despite fluctuations in UNI’s price. Since program budgets are set in USD, topping up the accounts is a necessary step to honor existing obligations, prevent operational shortfalls, and maintain credibility—consistent with the precedent set by the DAO during the Season 3 rebalance. ---
**Author:** ![CalBlockchain](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/calblockchain/32/9801_2.png) [@CalBlockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/CalBlockchain)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2025, 7:11am UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/8 "2025-04-24T07:11:34Z")
**UAC Renewal S4** **Voting Decision:** YES **Discussion Forum Link** : [https://gov.uniswap.org/t/uniswap-accountability-committee-uac-season-3-report/25467](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/uniswap-accountability-committee-uac-season-3-report/25467) **Off/Onchain Vote Link:** [https://snapshot.box/#/s:uniswapgovernance.eth/proposal/0x629995d68efbfea149bbd4fdc35cfcacca9bd327e3cbf1382fd6753df583e890](https://snapshot.box/#/s:uniswapgovernance.eth/proposal/0x629995d68efbfea149bbd4fdc35cfcacca9bd327e3cbf1382fd6753df583e890) **Explanation:** We are voting yes for renewing the UAC. Over the course of three seasons, the UAC has taken a central role in the DAO’s operational body. From facilitating cross-chain deployments, managing governance calls, and supporting incentive distribution, renewing the UAC ensures the infrastructure and stability needed for Uniswap’s governance to grow and adapt at scale. Additionally, the proposed $370K budget is reasonable given the additional operational responsibilities including the new implementation of the Foundation Feedback Group (FFG) and it’s value demonstrated across prior seasons. ---
**Author:** ![CalBlockchain](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/calblockchain/32/9801_2.png) [@CalBlockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/CalBlockchain)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2025, 10:54pm UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/9 "2025-04-24T22:54:46Z")
**Proposal Title: Treasury Delegation Round 2** **Voting Decision: YES** [Link to Discussion Forum of the Proposal](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/rfc-treasury-delegation-round-2/25355) [Link to off/onchain vote](https://snapshot.box/#/s:uniswapgovernance.eth/proposal/0x46fef087a43555e156db287d370151a76e19e1e2cd7d36f442409987f93d4215) Explanation: Voting yes because this proposal tightens up how treasury delegations are handled by: - putting a 15M UNI cap - setting 12 month expirations - makes sure only active delegates get selected - adds a community vote to choose 6 delegates to get a bit more voting power Overall this proposal is bringing more structure, accountability, and transparency to the DAO. Proposal Title: **Establish Uniswap v4 Licensing Process** Voting Decision: YES [Link to Discussion Forum of the Proposal](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/uniswap/proposal/85) [Link to off/onchain vote](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/uniswap/proposal/85) Explanation: This proposal sets up infrastructure for rolling v4 out quickly while BSL is still active by introducing license exemptions for deployment. Without these exemptions, deployment would be extremely slow, which will severely hurt v4’s early adoption. This proposal also allows UF to deploy v4 across multiple chains without needing to get the DAO’s approval every time. Furthermore, this proposal introduces an official registry of v4 deployments, necessary for keeping track of authorized v4 forks and reducing confusion for developers and users. ---
**Author:** ![CalBlockchain](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/calblockchain/32/9801_2.png) [@CalBlockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/CalBlockchain)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2025, 6:10am UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/10 "2025-05-04T06:10:02Z")
_**Approved Budgets Rebalancing (S4)**_ (On-Chain) YES [Link to Discussion Forum of the Proposal](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/uniswap/proposal/86) [Link to off/onchain vote](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/uniswap/proposal/86) Voting YES because a rebalance is necessary to ensure DAO program accounts have the correct budget after fluctuations in the UNI token price have created deficits in several accounts. The additional budget going into deficient accounts ensures Uniswap’s operational functions and community participation continue. ---
**Author:** ![CalBlockchain](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/calblockchain/32/9801_2.png) [@CalBlockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/CalBlockchain)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2025, 6:15am UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/11 "2025-05-04T06:15:44Z")
_UAC Renewal S4_ (on-chain) YES [Link to Discussion Forum of the Proposal](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/uniswap/proposal/87) [Link to off/onchain vote](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/uniswap/proposal/87) Renewing UAC ensures momentum isn’t lost, which is crucial for Uniswap v4 adoption. Furthermore, during UAC’s season 3 alone, there were 17 new v3 deployments, all while maintaining transparent accounting and managing incentive programs across several chains. Without renewal, there’s a risk of operational gaps in managing cross-chain deployments and incentive disbursements, which would directly negatively impact protocol usage and overall network growth. ---
**Author:** ![CalBlockchain](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/calblockchain/32/9801_2.png) [@CalBlockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/CalBlockchain)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2025, 6:23am UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/12 "2025-05-04T06:23:44Z")
_**[Temp Check] Analytics Hub for Uniswap’s Revitalization and Growth Program**_ YES [Link to Discussion Forum of the Proposal](https://snapshot.box/#/s:uniswapgovernance.eth/proposal/0x675c9697cc6c8d1cab27e1cffab3fdc7740b3e978eb37d8b6dcce76d1726670f) [Link to off/onchain vote](https://snapshot.box/#/s:uniswapgovernance.eth/proposal/0x675c9697cc6c8d1cab27e1cffab3fdc7740b3e978eb37d8b6dcce76d1726670f) Voting YES on this proposal because the UAC has become the DAO’s backbone and has been handling everything from cross-chain deployments to financial oversight. Having an analytics hub makes it straightforward to view UAC’s performance and metrics. Furthermore, granting the UAC the authority to manage subdomain updates for new deployments allows the DAO to reduce unnecessary on chain votes. This additional visibility boosts transparency and ensures Uniswap can scale efficiently without slowing down from on chain votes. _ **Four Chains for Analytics Hub for Uniswap’s Revitalization and Growth Program** _ Abstain [Link to Discussion Forum of the Proposal](https://snapshot.box/#/s:uniswapgovernance.eth/proposal/0xd0e154ab11dfeed1fb652c4a4db011937ffa7dd3333847936c09a668b5e5e804) [Link to off/onchain vote](https://snapshot.box/#/s:uniswapgovernance.eth/proposal/0xd0e154ab11dfeed1fb652c4a4db011937ffa7dd3333847936c09a668b5e5e804) No particular opinion on which four chains are supported on the analytics hub. _**[TEMP CHECK] Scaling V4 and Supporting Unichain**_ Abstain [Link to Discussion Forum of the Proposal](https://snapshot.box/#/s:uniswapgovernance.eth/proposal/0x58f16ed9e140551bb80d265ea9b958e96c542a7d7afc081610f72506a4f7cb05) [Link to off/onchain vote](https://snapshot.box/#/s:uniswapgovernance.eth/proposal/0x58f16ed9e140551bb80d265ea9b958e96c542a7d7afc081610f72506a4f7cb05) Abstaining due to unclear proposal details in regards to the blanket license for GFX Labs; it’s not clear what this license would allow in this context. ---
**Author:** ![CalBlockchain](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/calblockchain/32/9801_2.png) [@CalBlockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/CalBlockchain)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2025, 12:11am UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/13 "2025-05-13T00:11:01Z")
_ **Scaling V4 and Supporting Unichain** _ Abstain [Link to Discussion Forum](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/scaling-v4-and-supporting-unichain/25484) [Link to onchain vote](https://vote.uniswapfoundation.org/proposals/88) Abstaining with many of the same reasons [Gauntlet](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/gauntlet-delegate-platform/23967/28) listed. We believe blanket licenses may prove both unwieldy and unproductive in growing Uniswap’s frontend presence. However, we do not have deep knowledge of Uniswap’s history of licensing, so we Abstained rather than voted No. ---
**Author:** ![GFXlabs](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/gfxlabs/32/4510_2.png) [@GFXlabs](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/GFXlabs)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2025, 12:28am UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/14 "2025-05-13T00:28:18Z")
Hi guys, we addressed Gauntlets’ primary concerns with the revised Additional Use Grant text. > [@Scaling V4 and Supporting Unichain](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/scaling-v4-and-supporting-unichain/25484/41): > > Below is the Additional Use Grant text proposed by the UF and their GC. > > ```auto > GFX Labs (“GFX”) is granted an Additional Limited Use Grant to allow GFX to use the Uniswap V4 Core software code (which is made available to GFX subject to the license available at https://github.com/Uniswap/v4-core/blob/main/licenses/BUSL_LICENSE (the “Uniswap Code”)) subject to the below limitations. > > As part of this additional use grant, GFX receives a limited worldwide license to use the Uniswap Code for the purposes of creating, deploying and making available aspects of the Uniswap Protocol v4 (the “AMM”); and deploy the AMM as smart contracts on public blockchain networks. > > This grant does not confer rights to sublicense, and GFX may not assign such rights (in whole or in part) to any third party, including in connection with any merger, consolidation, reorganization, change of control, spin out, or sale of all, or substantially all, of GFX’s assets or business. > > This grant does not confer any rights to modify or alter the Uniswap Code. > > This grant does not confer rights to deploy Uniswap V4 without the brand name (forking). > > This grant requires affirmative approval by the Uniswap Accountability Committee (UAC) prior to deployment in a production environment. > > This grant requires Uniswap V4 deployments to be owned by the Uniswap DAO. > This license is conditional on GFX complying with the terms of the Business Source License 1.1, made available at https://github.com/Uniswap/v4-core/blob/main/licenses/BUSL_LICENSE. > > ``` We understand your vote has already been submitted, but for other voters, could you share what your concern is so we can best address it if others are in the same position? ---
**Author:** ![CalBlockchain](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/calblockchain/32/9801_2.png) [@CalBlockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/CalBlockchain)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2025, 6:12pm UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/15 "2025-05-25T18:12:54Z")
**UAC Season 4 Application** 20% each for Sov, Doo Wan Nam, Jordan Jordan Karstadt, Takeshi Ohishi, Cole Schendl [Link to Discussion Forum](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/uac-season-4-application/25580/1) [Link to Snapshot Vote](https://snapshot.box/#/s:uniswapgovernance.eth/proposal/0xb9a79884fab779132907835d8c6360b781ed0a17c8a33ac41594a27f6c366ce4) We decided to provide equal votes to all members we have seen as being productive members of the Uniswap DAO. We have not worked directly with any of these individuals, thus could not make any judgement calls on perceived effectiveness in this role. ---
**Author:** ![CalBlockchain](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/calblockchain/32/9801_2.png) [@CalBlockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/CalBlockchain)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2025, 5:58am UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/16 "2025-06-06T05:58:26Z")
_ **Scaling V4 and Supporting Unichain** _ Yes (on-chain) [Link to Discussion Forum](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/scaling-v4-and-supporting-unichain/25484) [Link to Vote](https://vote.uniswapfoundation.org/proposals/89) We’re supporting this proposal. While we initially had concerns around the blanket license, GFX’s revised Additional Use Grant addresses key issues—ensuring DAO ownership, UAC approval, and no sublicensing or code modification. GFX has a strong delivery track record (Oku across 30+ chains), and this proposal offers high ROI: expanding V4, supporting Unichain, and improving tooling for LPs, devs, and traders. The requested budget is reasonable and aligned with DAO priorities. ---
**Author:** ![CalBlockchain](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/calblockchain/32/9801_2.png) [@CalBlockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/CalBlockchain)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2025, 10:14pm UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/17 "2025-06-15T22:14:24Z")
**Trial run a Technical Advisory Board (TAB)** No [Link to Discussion](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/trial-run-a-technical-advisory-board-tab/25518/13) [Link to Snapshot vote](https://snapshot.box/#/s:uniswapgovernance.eth/proposal/0x5915e661808f896203ff5759e737e04861bf8fa09525972d481cbccf7776f485) This proposal introduces a 12-month pilot for a 6-member Technical Advisory Board (TAB) supported by a Professional Delegate (PD) to provide technical evaluations of Uniswap governance proposals. The group would receive **2.5M UNI in voting power** and **compensation totaling ~39,400 UNI**. Inspired by Optimism’s Developer Advisory Board, it aims to boost technical rigor and delegate education in the governance process. While the intention to enhance governance with technical input is laudable, the **current proposal introduces unnecessary complexity and cost for a problem that is not yet critical in scope**. The Uniswap DAO has seen very few proposals needing deep technical analysis, and alternative lightweight solutions (like extending existing technical grants to firms) could meet the need more efficiently. Furthermore, **pre-selecting all board members and assigning them significant voting power undermines decentralization**. For now, the value added does not justify the operational and governance risks introduced. ---
**Author:** ![CalBlockchain](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/calblockchain/32/9801_2.png) [@CalBlockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/CalBlockchain)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2025, 6:32am UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/18 "2025-06-22T06:32:06Z")
**Uniswap Unichain - USDS and sUSDS Co-Incentives Growth Management Plan** Yes [Link to Discussion](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/rfc-uniswap-unichain-usds-and-susds-co-incentives-growth-management-plan/25650) [Link to Snapshot Vote](https://snapshot.box/#/s:uniswapgovernance.eth/proposal/0x537a301c4c94c1ec0b972bab558e2e36b1fa1111f0cbc4d5a59b0465f505c9ab) Collaboration at this level with the Sky ecosystem seems conducive to growth and we hope this experiment leads to an improvement in Unichain metrics. ---
**Author:** ![CalBlockchain](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/calblockchain/32/9801_2.png) [@CalBlockchain](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/CalBlockchain)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2025, 5:53am UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/19 "2025-07-15T05:53:03Z")
**[TEMP CHECK] - Etherlink Co-incentives Proposal** **Vote:** DO NOT APPROVE [Link to Discussion](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/rfc-etherlink-x-uniswap-co-incentive-proposal/25670) [Link to Snapshot Vote](https://snapshot.box/#/s:uniswapgovernance.eth/proposal/0xc689d74757ccf1de09c3b8656dcd2f0d678972c9715a318aa4e9b659a5ebaca1) While Etherlink’s [TVL](https://defillama.com/chain/etherlink?borrowed=true) has been growing significantly from $2m to $98m (counting borrow TVL), this growth seems primarily driven by their incentive program [Apple Farm](https://app.applefarm.xyz/opportunities). There is concern with incentivizing liquidity as it promotes mercenary capital and raises question on the sustainability of organic user activity. Co-incentives should be given out selectively and not to boost short term metrics. If Etherlink is able to show long term growth and sustained capital, Blockchain at Berkeley is open to reconsidering our vote. At this time, Blockchain at Berkeley is voting against this proposal. ---
**Author:** ![GFXlabs](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/gov.uniswap.org/gfxlabs/32/4510_2.png) [@GFXlabs](https://gov.uniswap.org/u/GFXlabs)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2025, 8:33pm UTC](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378/20 "2025-07-16T20:33:54Z")
Not to single out Cal (I’ve posted the same comment on 404’s thread), but this sort of thinking isn’t constructive for a high-growth startup like Uniswap. Generally speaking, we’re going to need to allocate funds to many things, most will fail, but the few that succeed will succeed so massively that it will cover all the prior investments and produce a considerable return. It seems contradictory to vote against this well-structured request for $150K when Cal (and most of the DAO) voted in favor of the +7.5M UNI funding package for Unichain and Uniswap v4. [Next page](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/calblockchain-blockchain-at-berkeley-delegate-platform/25378.md?page=2)