I’ve been hanging around the DeFi space and participating in governance for the past few months, primarily in MakerDAO and Compound governance, but also with a few other projects.
You can find me on other discourse forums as @monet-supply and on twitter. You can also review my voting history with Compound here to see if our governance philosophies align.
My commitments as a delegate:
12+ hrs advanced notice before I submit votes, giving time to un-delegate your stake if you disagree
I am sure that monet-supply will be a great delegate that will act in the long term interest of UNI holders. Also I think that he is aware of the disrupting force of defi and that we need to govern it to the good of the world.
We have a chance in our own hands to make the world a little fairer finally. As we see mainstream adoption I believe monet-supply will still play an important role to our space.
I trust him. We’re all >early< and will continue to develop. Monet-supply is already far more developed than most will ever be.
could you outline your views on the future of the Uni protocol; fee switch, airdrops, future pools etc.
Then I could have a better idea if I should delegate to you, thanks!
Fee switch - In the short term, I don’t think it makes sense to turn on the fee switch. My preferred strategy would be wait for v3 deployment and for that to stabilize, and then potentially turn the fees on for v2 later as a sort of soft incentive for LPs to migrate liquidity.
More generally, I think protocol level swap fees should be minimized as much as possible, and other revenue models like withdrawal fees may be more acceptable to LPs:
Airdrops - I’m generally supportive of the work Dharma is doing on a distribution to wallets for proxy contract users who were not included in initial airdrop. I don’t support distribution for users after the Sept 1 cutoff date.
Pools - I like Uniswap’s launch strategy of targeting rewards to the most important assets/pairs. Deep WBTC and stablecoin pools help improve the Uniswap trading experience for users who prefer to trade based in BTC or USD, and potentially help increase volume for a bunch of long tail assets through “trickle down” liquidity if you will.
I’m not a big fan of handpicking project tokens for rewards, it can become a distraction for governance and is very hard to maintain neutrality. Balancer does a fairly good job with their whitelisting and liquidity caps, but it seems like a lot of work to maintain and update. For now, I think Uniswap should focus rewards on ETH/BTC/USD pairs.
For now I am delegating to gauntlet.network as they have the largest share of votes and will be first to be able to make new proposals, furthermore they have a good presence with research approach and clear accountability. 0x6626593C237f530D15aE9980A95ef938Ac15c35c
Please keep a presence here in the forums and I’m sure I will be looking to move my support at some points in the future.
Would you be interested in joining a voting block [a multi-sig that we could mutually delegate to] with other delegates, Monet-Supply?
I would like to organize delegates to try to pass some of the first initiatives. If so, please find and contact me (Hiturunk #4296) in the community discord channel #uni-universe to discuss founding the Penguin Party further.
I won’t be able to participate because most votes on my address are delegated to me and re-delegation is not supported. Side note, I’m also not sure about incentivizing UNI/ETH, I think the resources could probably be better spent somewhere else - so we’re not really aligned on this.
But, this is a really cool idea and I wish you the best of luck! Making it easier for small holders to participate and have influence could also give people more reasons to hold onto their UNI
Hello @monet-supply you should recognize the handle to some extent.
See another post of mine on this rewarding UNI UNI-tokenpair LP providers and coupling an extra reward to governance participation.
IF UNI UNI-pair tokens could participate in governance and earn a base LP UNI reward and additional one based on UNI governance participation that would be ideal.
I can’t add a link even to other forum posts yet see my post here on the topic.
One other thought @monet-supply given the sheer amount of DAO projects I am involved in it is getting harder to keep up.
As a delegate will you keep us posted as to the pros/cons to proposals as well as your current vote take and a means for us who are delegating a means to provide feedback that might sway your view. I don’t expect I will always agree with a delegate and I don’t want to have to pull my vote everytime I do. But I expect a delegate will do basic things:
Provide a kind of proposal status update to the folks (a kind of proposal report) with pros and cons as you see them.
A quick summary with how your vote is leaning.
A means for us the token holders to weigh in to support or not your stance .
I will vouch for @monet-supply as an excellent delegate to consider delegating to! He has performed excellent analyses of Maker, Compound, and Aave and his body of work on their forums is excellent.
Hey @Uni_Man great to see you over here! Yeah I agree 12 hours is a little bit short. Given Uniswap’s 7 day voting period for proposals, I’ll definitely wait a full day + before submitting the vote.
I also recently learned that there is no way to remove votes from a delegate after a proposal is made (un-delegating only impacts future proposals). Technically, I would have the ability to cast your votes on an already submitted proposal as I see fit, even if vote owners who delegated to me disagreed.
But I try to keep an open mind and would always be happy to discuss proposals
uni-universe to discuss founding the Penguin Party further.