Curia Delegate Platform

Delegation Pitch
1

Key Information

  • Name: Curia
  • Delegate ENS: curia-delegates.eth
  • Delegate Address: 0x17296956b4E07Ff8931E4ff4eA06709FaB70b879
  • Forum Username: @curia
  • Telegram: @v3dao
  • Twitter: curia_gov
  • Website: curiahub.xyz

About Us
Curia Lab is a team of seasoned DAO governance researchers, data analysts, blockchain engineers, and developers. We are committed to strengthening the DAO ecosystem through specialized tools, insights, and delegate services.

Our Goal for Uniswap
Curia Lab aligns with Uniswap’s vision of an open, efficient, and decentralized financial system. Our goal is to leverage our experience in data-driven governance to support Uniswap’s core values. We aim to enhance Uniswap’s decision-making, transparency, and progressive decentralization. Our commitment to fostering innovation, ensuring user protection, and promoting financial inclusion will help Uniswap achieve sustained growth and maintain its leadership as a top DEX.

Disclosure
As a team deeply involved in governance research and DAO operations, we engage with various projects and DAOs such as Optimism, Safe, Arbitrum, Gnosis, etc. to improve their governance. We pledge to maintain transparency and manage any potential conflicts of interest responsibly, especially in our dealings with Uniswap and its community.

Waiver of Liability
By delegating to Curia for Uniswap governance, delegators acknowledge that Curia will participate on a best-effort basis and will not be liable for any damages related to this participation.

3 Likes
2

Hey @Curia, welcome happy to see you here.

3 Likes
3

:page_with_curl: [Temp Check] Uniswap Onboarding Package - Gnosis Chain

We are supporting the “$250k” funding option for the Gnosis Chain Onboarding Package. This aligns well with the Uniswap Revitalization and Growth Proposal, which aims to expand Uniswap’s presence on emerging networks.The Proposal outlines three funding tiers: $250k, $500k, and $1M. It appears that the majority of projects with a Total Value Locked (TVL) under $800 million typically receive $250k. Since Gnosis Chain’s reported TVL exceeded $300+ million, it falls within this tier. We believe this funding level is a balanced approach, allowing Uniswap to explore opportunities on Gnosis Chain while maintaining prudent resource allocation.

4

:page_with_curl: [TEMP CHECK] Uniswap Onboarding Package - OKX Chain

We vote “Against” in giving incentives at this time while supporting the deployment of Uniswap v3 on X Layer, as expanding to new chains can potentially benefit the Uniswap ecosystem. However, we oppose allocating any incentives for now because the current TVL on X Layer is significantly lower than other chains where Uniswap has been deployed without incentives, This approach allows us to expand Uniswap’s presence while letting the deployment prove its value organically within the X Layer ecosystem. We can revisit the possibility of incentives in the future if X Layer demonstrates substantial growth in TVL, increased decentralization, and active user adoption.

5

:page_with_curl: [Temp Check] Forse Analytics for Uniswap Revitalization and Growth Program

We support the Forse proposal, as we believe in data-driven analysis that helps the DAO optimize future incentive programs to drive long-term growth and maximize the value of the Uniswap protocol. Our allocation strategy focuses on blockchains exceeding $100M in TVL, with voting percentages precisely reflecting each network’s Total Value Locked: Arbitrum: 41%, Base: 21%, Blast: 13%, Scroll: 9%, Linea: 8%, Mantle: 7%. By allocating votes proportionally to TVL, we ensure that the analysis reflects the influence of the most impactful networks in the ecosystem.

6

:page_with_curl: [TEMP CHECK]- Revised - Uniswap Onboarding Package - OKX Chain
We vote “For” the revised proposal because it removes the request for UNI incentives that we previously were concerned about. This revised proposal offers a balanced solution: Uniswap covers the frontend costs for Oku Trade, demonstrating commitment to the expansion, while X Layer provides $1 million in liquidity for at least 6 months to prove its value organically.

7

:page_with_curl: Onboarding Package for Gnosis Chain

We vote “For” with the $250k funding option for Gnosis Chain in the on-chain vote, mirroring our off-chain position.

8

:page_with_curl: [Temp Check] Activate 2, 3, 4 bps fee tiers on Uniswap v3 on Base

We vote “yes” to support activating the additional bps fee tiers as a time-bound experiment. By implementing these for a defined period, we can gather valuable data on their impact on trading volume, revenue, and market share. If successful, this experiment could inform future strategies not just on Base, but potentially on other chains as well.

However, our support for this snapshot does not automatically extend to an on-chain vote. We expect to see more comprehensive research conducted and clear answers about the plan and details of community remaining questions.

9

:page_with_curl: Deploy Uniswap v3 on X Layer

We vote “For” this revised proposal which Uniswap covers Oku Trade’s frontend costs, X Layer provides $1M liquidity for 6 months. This aligns with our off-chain position.

10

:page_with_curl: [Temp Check] Uniswap Delegate Reward Initiative - Cycle 2

We vote “Yes” on continuing the compensation program for delegates. The data from Cycle 1 demonstrates the program’s success in improving delegate participation and dedication, achieving 100% voting participation among selected delegates and attracting 5 new delegates, including us. This aligns with the general consensus that the compensation program could enhance delegate engagement.

Cycle 2 introduces several adjustments to accommodate more new delegates. These changes include increasing the number of positions from 12 to 15, allowing applications from delegates who have joined less than 3 months ago, and removing the requirement for a minimum Voting Power. These modifications contrast with Cycle 1’s stricter criteria due to the goal of attracting existing delegates, which required delegates to have been Uniswap delegates for at least 3 months and have a Voting Power of 10,000 $UNI or authorship of a passed off-chain proposal.

The point metrics for Cycle 2 have been adjusted to be more accessible to new delegates. Voting participation rate will now be based on the past 6 months, counterbalanced by the first date of on-chain voting. Additionally, the maximum points for authoring a proposal that passed an on-chain vote have been reduced.

Full compensation eligibility in Cycle 2 maintains the 80% voting participation requirement and offers additional rewards for writing rationales. It also introduces a new criterion: attending Uniswap Community Calls, which we support. The tie-breaker method has changed from the number of “likes” in Cycle 1 to the date of the first on-chain vote in Cycle 2.

We acknowledge community concerns about potential sybil attacks and spam delegates who might focus on perfect track records without quality contributions because Cycle 2 removes economic stake requirements, and there are worries that reputation stake will not affect them. Regarding the balance between quantity and quality, we believe it’s crucial to develop measurable metrics for quality over time. We agree with the approach of starting simple and gradually refining the process based on learnings from previous cycles, as evidenced by the improvements in Cycle 2. We suggest including a session for applicants to disclose potential conflicts of interest, especially for new applicants who may not yet have established Delegate Platforms.

2 Likes
11

:page_with_curl: Uniswap Delegate Reward Initiative - Cycle 2

We vote “For” to continue Uniswap Delegate Reward Cycle 2. This aligns with our off-chain position.

12

:page_with_curl: [Temp Check] - Ethereum Foundation Attackathon Sponsorship

We vote “Do not sponsor” We truly appreciate the effort behind this proposal and recognize the value of improving security across the Ethereum and DeFi ecosystems. The Attackathon initiative is commendable, but after careful consideration, we feel that the requested funding amount is quite substantial without a direct, tangible benefit to Uniswap. While security is vital, we believe Uniswap’s resources could be better used for projects more aligned with our core goals.

13

:page_with_curl: Proposal to active 2, 3, 4 bps fee-tiers on Base

We vote “For” to active 2, 3, 4 bps fee-tiers on Base. This aligns with our off-chain position.

14

:page_with_curl: UAC Renewal S3

We vote ‘Renew UAC’. The Uniswap Accountability Committee (UAC) demonstrated strong performance in Season 2, as evidenced by its report, effectively managing its responsibilities and supporting key DAO initiatives. Initially, the UAC operated at 10 hours per week, but as the scope of its duties expanded, the workload now requires an increase to 30 hours per week. We understand that this expanded scope justifies the additional hours requested, ensuring that the committee can meet growing demands. The addition of a new seat further strengthens the UAC, making its renewal for Season 3 essential for maintaining operational efficiency.

15

:page_with_curl: Approved Budgets Rebalancing

We vote ‘Approved Rebalance’ due to the volatility of the UNI token, which led to an imbalance in the previously USD-denominated budgets. The rebalancing is essential to ensure the continued smooth operation of the UAC and to meet its financial obligations. The UAC has demonstrated responsible management and good accounting practices in Season 2, making the request for additional UNI justified. In the long term, stablecoins might provide a solution to avoid frequent rebalancing, but this is the best path forward for now.

16

:page_with_curl: Uniswap Delegate Race Tiebreaker

We vote ‘Both (create an extra 16th spot)’ The tie-breaker for Cycle 2, which was voted on-chain, clearly states that “the tie will be decided by the date of the first on-chain vote.” We should honor this on-chain decision and adhere to the framework established by the DAO.

While we understand and appreciate the good intentions of the Working Group in resolving this situation, it is essential to respect the decision-making process that has already been carried out on-chain. The tie-breaker system from the initiative, though well-intentioned, was unexpectedly insufficient in this case. It’s encouraging to see Argonaut raising awareness about this, which will undoubtedly lead to improvements in future cycles.

As both delegates are equal under the established rule, I believe the fair decision is to vote “Both” and create a 16th spot. Though it expands the budget slightly, respecting the community-approved rule seems the most equitable choice, and both should be included.

17

:page_with_curl: Uniswap Accountability S3 Renewal and Rebalance

We vote “For” to approve this proposal, which includes the snapshot budget approval for the Uniswap Accountability Renewal (UAC) Season 3, an approved budget rebalance, and an additional delegate cycle 2 spot for Argonaut and Tane. This decision aligns with our off-chain positions on UAC Renewal S3, Approved Budgets Rebalancing, Uniswap Delegate Race Tiebreaker off-chain position.

18

:page_with_curl::x: Forse Analytics for Uniswap Revitalization and Growth Program

The concept of a data analysis platform for data-driven insights that help the DAO optimize future incentive programs to drive long-term growth remains consistent with our rationale from the previous Snapshot vote. We appreciate that the team has reduced the price in response to community feedback and avoided overlap with Gauntlet’s work.

However, I will vote Against because, in the prior Snapshot vote, the top four blockchain choices were Base (36.54%), Arbitrum (32.7%), Scroll (3.67%), and Blast (3.67%). Yet, in this on-chain proposal, Arbitrum, Base, and Blast were selected, with the team using TVL as a tie-breaker to choose Base over Scroll. While we understand and appreciate the intent to prioritize higher TVL for the DAO’s benefit, this decision contradicts the community-approved result from the Snapshot vote.

This issue has occurred before in another tie-breaker situation. If there had been a discussion with the DAO and a proper vote to decide the tie-breaker, we would have voted For. Since we stand by the principle of respecting the DAO’s decision, we will vote Against this time.

2 Likes
19

:page_with_curl::white_check_mark: Uniswap Accountability Committee S3 Elections
We voted for Alex Duckworth, Alicecorsini, _JoJo, Doo, and Jayyu23, allocating our vote equally among them because we believe each possesses the essential skills and qualifications to serve effectively on the Uniswap Accountability Committee.

:page_with_curl::x: [TEMP CHECK] - Onboarding Package for Lisk
We voted Against the onboarding package for Lisk.
Despite Lisk’s financial commitments, the proposal represents a significant cost and risk to the Uniswap DAO. We believe allocating $375,000 in UNI incentives to a chain with a nascent DeFi ecosystem and relatively small TVL is a speculative use of treasury funds. The risk of attracting short-term liquidity that departs after the three-month incentive period is high, and this sets a costly precedent for future chain integrations.

:page_with_curl::white_check_mark: Uniswap Growth Program Trial
We voted “In Support” because the proposal addresses a critical need to shift from a reactive to a proactive growth strategy. It introduces dedicated teams to pursue outbound business development and marketing, which will help secure new chain deployments and strategic partnerships that are currently being missed. Furthermore, the creation of the Uniswap Ecosystem Incentives Initiative (UEII) establishes a formal process to capture and distribute significant grant funding from other chains, directly benefiting Uniswap users and boosting ecosystem activity. This structured approach is vital for maintaining Uniswap’s leadership and ensuring its continued expansion in the competitive DeFi landscape.

::chains:::white_check_mark: [Updated] Forse Analytics for Uniswap Revitalization and Growth Program
We voted FOR this proposal to ensure data-driven accountability for the significant DAO funds committed to the Uniswap Revitalization and Growth Program. The analysis by Forse is essential for determining the program’s effectiveness and will provide invaluable insights to optimize future incentive strategies. We were confident in StableLab’s ability to deliver, given their proven expertise and their responsiveness to community feedback, which resulted in a reduced budget, an expanded scope, and a more accountable payment structure managed by the Uniswap Accountability Committee.

::chains:::white_check_mark: Uniswap Growth Program Trial
We voted FOR in alignment with our previously published off-chain rationale. We have maintained our position as stated and have voted accordingly.

:page_with_curl::white_check_mark: [TEMP CHECK] - Tally Uniswap Proposal

We voted FOR supporting Tally’s Development and Enhancements for Uniswap DAO Governance because Tally is essential and proven infrastructure for the DAO. As the most-used platform for creating proposals and casting votes, its continued operation and improvement are critical. The funding supports a clear roadmap for valuable new features like gasless voting and ensures the long-term decentralization and health of Uniswap’s governance process.

::chains:::white_check_mark: Supporting Tally’s Development and Enhancements for Uniswap DAO Governance
We voted FOR in alignment with our previously published off-chain rationale. We have maintained our position as stated and have voted accordingly.

:page_with_curl::white_check_mark: [TEMP CHECK] Uniswap DAO Principles

I am voting For the “Principles for Uniswap DAO” proposal because it establishes a foundational ethical framework that aligns delegates and participants with shared values, promoting decentralization, transparency, and resilience. While these principles largely reflect the ethical standards many delegates already uphold, having them formalized provides clarity and alignment across the ecosystem. Although aspirational for now, they set a clear direction for the DAO’s long-term sustainability. Future efforts could explore enforcement mechanisms to enhance their impact, but this proposal is a vital step toward fostering trust, neutrality, and consistency in governance.

20

:page_with_curl::white_check_mark: [TEMP CHECK] Scale Uniswap Liquidity on Celo

I intend to vote FOR during this Temp Check because the proposal aligns with prior Uniswap deployments in emerging networks and offers more real-world use case visibility and growth in these ecosystems. Given that projects with a TVL under $800 million typically receive a $250k incentive, and Celo’s TVL is $124.57 million, this incentive seems appropriate. However, I remain mindful of questions surrounding liquidity quality, user sustainability, and project timeline.

:page_with_curl::white_check_mark: [Temp Check] - Adopt The SEAL Safe Harbor Agreement

I am voting FOR the adoption of the SEAL Safe Harbor Agreement as it provides a structured and effective solution to protect Uniswap’s funds during active exploits. The proposal establishes clear rules for intervention, including mandatory return of funds within 72 hours, and sets financial boundaries with a predefined 10% bounty (capped at $2.25M), matching Uniswap Labs’ existing bug bounty for V3. This ensures whitehats are fairly incentivized while avoiding conflicting priorities with standard vulnerability disclosures.

By offering legal protection and on-chain transparency, it ensures whitehats act ethically and effectively while aligning with industry best practices. This structured approach answers my concerns about accountability, incentives, and emergency response, strengthening Uniswap’s security and boosting user trust.

:page_with_curl::x: [TEMP CHECK] Metal L2: Bridging TradFi and DeFi Through Uniswap V3
We voted Against this proposal because the Metal L2 network currently shows very low activity and Total Value Locked (TVL). While we recognize the potential of bridging traditional finance with DeFi, we believe it is not productive to allocate incentives at this time. We are open to reconsidering if the network shows signs of maturity and traction in the future.

:page_with_curl::white_check_mark: Discretionary Budget from UAC for Co-Incentive Campaigns
We voted “Allow UAC Surplus Spending” to enable Uniswap to act decisively on time-sensitive, high-impact opportunities without the delays of the standard governance process. This allows for the rapid execution of co-incentive campaigns, such as the immediate $250,000 match with EtherFi, by leveraging existing surplus funds. The proposal includes clear spending limits and transparency through UAC reporting, ensuring both agility and accountability.