I will be voting against this proposal.
In plain language, what is being requested is for the DAO to allow Gauntlet to spend ~$10M with no publicly defined objectives, no clear deadline, and effectively no DAO oversight.
I had abstained from commenting earlier, hoping that Gauntlet would provide more details — know they have been asked privately — but the proposal has now reached the Snapshot voting stage.
First, the proposal is written in a disingenuous way, framing the change as a purely technical extension. In reality, approving it would allow incentive campaigns to continue beyond the original timeline and objectives.
Second, judging from the original proposal, the incentive campaign only had clearly stated goals for the first six months. The 12-month limit already extends beyond that. Time limits exist for a good reason. It may be prudent that the incentives were not spent in full! But that does not give Gauntlet a mandate to run them indefinitely.
The DAO should have a meaningful say in how these incentives are used. Historical performance of Gauntlet’s campaigns (not limited to Uniswap) should be considered as part of that discussion.
There are currently 2,662,156 UNI tokens in the Aera vault, which is more than $10M at current UNI prices. The proposal notes that “Uniswap Governance maintains the ability to claw back the remaining allocated funds.”