Do you not think there is any fair issue raised with regard to keeping small Uni holders engaged and maintaining a community of as many people as possible from diverse economic backgrounds.
Is there no risk that Uniswap will just turn into a platform that’s by in large governed by a few, self-interested whales, who’ll manage to accumulate a dominant share of the voting power?
0.05% is probably too high a share of the total 0.3%, at this point in time, I saw a post on discord pointing out that this percentage is hardcoded, so changing it in smaller increments is probably going to have to wait until a new version release, but a smaller share would probably work fine for keeping small holders engaged. It would be something at least.
I think you’re wrong to see this exclusively as a way “to steal fees from LP nothing else”.
Do you think there’s another way to incentivise small Uni holders to maintain a position in governance, or do you think it’s unimportant/ they should just wait for an indeterminate amount of time?
For me personally, I can’t really justify holding on to the whole 400 Uni I was gifted without some sort of return, it’s too large a proportion of my crypto holdings. I imagine I’m far from alone in this position, the volatility these past couple of days alone has pushed me to sell some of it, it’ll be interesting to see if there’s any analysis done on who buys it all during this drop.