Gauntlet Delegate Platform

Delegation Pitch
21

Adopt The SEAL Safe Harbor Agreement (Onchain)
Vote: For
Gauntlet favors adopting the SEAL Whitehat Safe Harbor Agreement and supporting whitehats to enhance user fund security.

Uniswap DAO Principles (Onchain)
Vote: For
Gauntlet is in favor of the principles outlined in this proposal.

22

Uniswap Delegate Reward Initiative - Cycle 3 (Snapshot)
Vote: For
Gauntlet voted in favor of the Uniswap Delegate Reward Initiative, although we believe significant issues here tailor more toward “participation” rather than actual impact. It’s still a worthwhile experiment worth pursuing.

[Temp Check] Uniswap Unleashed
Vote: For
The Uniswap Foundation has proven to be a critical partner to the DAOs success. Having seen the roadmap presented by the Foundation, Gauntlet has faith in the Foundation to execute it’s duties on behalf of the DAO.

[Temp Check] Unichain and Uniswap v4 Liquidity Incentives
Vote: Abstain
Gauntlet will abstain from this vote as a contributor to the Uniswap V4 Liquidity Incentives proposal. However, we fully support the proposal and believe incentives will be critical to bootstrap liquidity on both V4 and Unichain.

23

Uniswap Delegate Reward Initiative - Cycle 3 (Onchain)
Vote: For
Again, we support a broader and more critical understanding of the DAO’s definition of a valuable delegate. That said, it is a fair initiative for the time being. Our full comments in the proposal thread capture these points specifically.

24

[Temp Check] Saga Uniswap v3 Liquidity Incentives
Vote: Against
Gauntlet has voted against the Saga Uniswap V3 incentives due to the lack of traction on the Saga platform. This proposal remains unclear on the potential value provided to the Uniswap ecosystem given this investment.

Unichain and Uniswap v4 Liquidity Incentives (Onchain)
Vote: Abstain
Gauntlet has abstained from this proposal given it’s role as the chosen service provider to support the Unichain and Uniswap V4 incentives.

Uniswap Unleashed (Onchain)
Vote: For
Gauntlet believes the Uniswap Foundation has proven to be a competent stakeholder in the Uniswap DAO ecosystem and believes the grants program and strategic guidance are critical to Uniswap’s success. We support the funding of the UF, including the increased personnel objectives.

25

Treasury Delegation Round 2
Vote: Abstain
We have voted to abstain from this temperature check, citing below our issues with the proposal’s current iterations alongside our previously communicated concerns. To confidently support this proposal, we would request the following change:

  • A 6-month or 12-month delegation program at maximum, rather than an 18-month delegation. 18 months is too long to go without reevaluation and, more importantly, too long to allow new delegates to be included.

We also do not fully agree with the rationale or criteria for the top 6 delegates receiving greater VP delegation. The scoring criteria do not reflect delegate quality, only participation, and the benefits of supporting certain delegates above others based on slim participation margins are unclear.

26

[TEMP CHECK] BoB Uniswap v3 Incentives Package
Vote: For
Gauntlet believes the data suggests BOB is a worthwhile chain to support given the small investment size. That said, we do believe this program needs to be streamlined and adjusted.

[TEMP CHECK] Establish Uniswap v4 Licensing Process
Vote: For
Gauntlet has voted for this proposal but we feel the need to express that there should be a clear guideline that no payment or compensation from external parties should be awarded to UAC members for the granting of external licenses, and any payments in negotiations should be made public.

27

BoB Uniswap v3 Incentives Package (Onchain)
Vote: For
Gauntlet believes the data suggests BOB is a worthwhile chain to support, given the small investment size. That said, we do believe this program needs to be streamlined and adjusted.

Establish Uniswap v4 Licensing Process (Onchain)
Vote: For
Gauntlet has voted for this proposal following confirmation from @AbdullahUmar concerning the UAC’s inability to grant external licenses.

[Temp Check/Revised] Treasury Delegation Round 2 (Snapshot)
Vote: Abstain
This proposal would raise Treasury Delegation above 37% of the quorum if passed as written. After discussions with internal delegates and DAO stakeholders, we remain concerned that this would mark a significant and inappropriate shift toward delegate capture, thus degrading the DAO’s original intent to empower UNI token holders to govern the Uniswap DAO treasury and Uniswap protocol parameters (namely the fee switch). Expanding a 10M UNI delegation program, which already comprises 25% of the quorum, sets too risky a precedent at a time when delegate incentives have proven effective in activating Uniswap DAO voting power to achieve quorum on an ongoing basis. @kaereste and @Sinkas also provided a prescient analysis of the deep problems associated with Treasury delegation.
We are open to further discussion and evaluation. Still, the extensibility and feasibility of Treasury Delegation become less attractive as the DAO proceeds toward a DUNA and more formal legal architecture.
Lastly, we appreciate the hard work @Tane has put into facilitating the debate around the proposal. These are difficult conversations, and we’ve found @Takeshi_Tane adept at guiding them forward.

Approved Budgets Rebalancing (S4) (Snapshot)
Vote: Approve Rebalance
Gauntlet has voted to rebalance the UAC with $280,142 of UNI.

UAC Renewal S4 (Snapshot)
Vote: Renew UAC
The UAC has demonstrated competence in supporting DAO-endorsed initiatives, and we are voting in favor of its renewal.

28

[TEMP CHECK] Scaling V4 and Supporting Unichain (Snapshot)
Vote: Against
Gauntlet has voted against this proposal for the time being due to several outstanding concerns:

  • Blanket License Designation: It’s unclear what “blanket” licensing entails in this context. The DAO has already granted license rights to the Uniswap Foundation, and it’s ambiguous whether this proposal allows Oku Trade to sub-license or enable forks of V4, including new brands, tokens, or frontends on other chains. Why can’t a one-off license for Oku’s use case be managed through the Foundation or proposed via a subcommittee process?
  • Oku Trade Development Grant: We’d prefer clarification on why Oku was not supported in the latest grant cycle. This proposal seems to be downstream from the Foundation’s remit. If an application is rejected, we will still view Oku as a long-standing partner and would not necessarily rule out DAO-based funding as an alternative.
  • Concerns with Expansion Strategy: As noted in previous discussions (including recent proposals from StableLab and AlphaGrowth), we remain skeptical of the efficacy of past Uniswap expansion efforts. Many expansion proposals have targeted low-quality chains, leading to administrative burden and poor capital efficiency. Without a clear shift in strategy, we currently do not support expanding blanket rights to Oku or continuing V3’s licensing precedent.

Oku Trade has proven to be a committed partner to Uniswap, but we believe some of this proposal’s high-level strategic implications for expansion require reassessment.

29

[Temp Check] Analytics Hub for Uniswap’s Revitalization and Growth Program & Four Chains for Analytics Hub for Uniswap’s Revitalization and Growth Program
Votes: Abstain
While we support the StableLab team and believe their previous dashboards provided valuable insight, we remain unconvinced of the effectiveness of Uniswap’s V3 growth strategy as reflected in both AlphaGrowth and GFX in similar proposals to extend this program in various forms. We believe the strategic extension of V4 and the launch of Unichain require new tactics to ensure Uniswap’s long-term growth. We’re open to discussing what this may look like moving forward.

30

Scaling V4 and Supporting Unichain (Onchain)
Vote: For
Gauntlet voted for this proposal following the license changes, although we feel it is worth re-evaluating the costs associated with it. We feel $250K is a bit high, and we could not attend the metrics meeting for Oku; we would prefer to view a recording if it is available.

31

Uniswap Accountability Committee S4 Elections
Vote: 40% Doo, 15% Cole Schendl, 15% Takeshi, 10% Sov, 10% Jordan Karstadt
Gauntlet has voted in accordance with a candidate’s historic involvement in Uniswap DAO, perceived impact, and our confidence in the individual to fulfill the UAC role as articulated in the proposal.

32

Scaling V4 and Supporting Unichain (Onchain)
Vote: For
Gauntlet voted for this proposal following the license changes, although we feel it is worth re-evaluating the costs associated with it. We feel $250K is a bit high, and we could not attend the metrics meeting for Oku; we would prefer to view a recording if it is available.

Scaling V4 and Supporting Unichain (Onchain -second vote)
Vote: For
Gauntlet voted for this proposal following the license changes, although we feel it is worth re-evaluating the costs associated with it. We feel $250K is a bit high, and we could not attend the metrics meeting for Oku; we would prefer to view a recording if it is available.

1 Like
33

Trial run a Technical Advisory Board (TAB)
Vote: Against
As mentioned on a community call and the forum, we believe there are still a few outstanding issues with this proposal:

  • Any council of this nature should have an accountable lead, and the budget should likely be re-weighted to compensate them accordingly.
  • As explained in previous treasury delegation discussions, we are generally against delegating voting power to this council or the treasury delegation. There is also no clear rationale for why the TAB should receive delegation.
  • It is still unclear why a board is more capital or operationally efficient than hiring a single service provider or professional auditor to review proposals and advise on technical proposal construction thoroughly.
34

Uniswap Unichain - USDS and sUSDS Co-Incentives Growth Management Plan
Vote: For
We directionally support this proposal and look forward to further details. We believe Sky is a strong partner for Unichain’s growth and hope to discuss in greater detail the strategy for Unichain’s growth moving forward. Further, we are happy to see the DAO take action to support DeFi growth on Unichain.

35

[TEMP CHECK] - Etherlink Co-incentives Proposal (Snapshot)
Vote: Against
Gauntlet does not believe this represents a critical use of DAO funds and as noted previously requests changes to the expansion incentives program.

1 Like
36

Uniswap Delegate Reward Initiative - Cycle 4 (Snapshot)
Gauntlet has voted in favor of extending Cycle 4 of the Uniswap Delegate Reward Initiative. As previously noted, we feel that delegate engagement is critical moving forward to maintain quorum-reaching capabilities, and to keep momentum up ahead of the DUNI launch.

Delegate incentives have proven effective at maintaining high-participation from large UNI token-holders, we fear that halting the program could result in significantly lower participation.

38

Establish Uniswap Governance as “DUNI,” a Wyoming DUNA (Snapshot)
Vote: For

Gauntlet believes the DUNI represents an important evolution in the Uniswap DAO, which is perhaps the most important proposal of the last year. The DUNI enables the DAO to have a legal wrapper that is US-based and sets the DAO up for additional utility, engagement from stakeholders, and clear tax and regulatory status, empowering the Uniswap ecosystem to deliver greater value to the Uniswap Protocol and the UNI token.

39

Establish Uniswap Governance as “DUNI,” a Wyoming DUNA (Onchain)
Vote: For

Gauntlet believes the DUNI represents an important evolution in the Uniswap DAO, which is perhaps the most important proposal of the last year. The DUNI enables the DAO to have a legal wrapper that is US-based and sets the DAO up for additional utility, engagement from stakeholders, and clear tax and regulatory status, empowering the Uniswap ecosystem to deliver greater value to the Uniswap Protocol and the UNI token.

Uniswap Unichain - USDS and sUSDS Co-Incentives Growth Management Plan (Onchain)
Vote: For
We believe Sky is a strong partner for Unichain’s growth and hope to discuss in greater detail the strategy for Unichain’s growth moving forward. Further, we are happy to see the DAO take action to support DeFi growth on Unichain.

Launching Uniswap v3 on Ronin with co-incentives (Snapshot)
Vote: Against
As expressed previously, the return on investment for secondary chains is unclear, especially as the Ronin chain and Katana DEX have historically shown meaningful stagnation and little growth. We’d be willing to revisit this proposal if there is a compelling case for the future of DeFi on Ronin and greater information regarding the terms of POL deployment (Size and Length), but currently, the data does not support this investment.

GLI — Treasury Delegation Round 2 (Snapshot)
Vote: Abstain
With the DUNI approval this week it seems premature to commit to long-term treasury delegation when the expected outcome is to increase participation due to the new legal structure. We are open to revisiting this, but remain consistent in the opinion that treasury delegation is not an ideal solution to the quorum problem. Further, quorum is not hampering critical votes, such as the DUNI or funding of the Uniswap Foundation, and therefore the arguments that Quorum is critical for operations seem somewhat embellished.

** GLI — Incentivized Delegation Vaults** (Snapshot)
Vote: Abstain
Currently, incentivized delegation vaults are interesting, but little evidence shows that incentives for delegated voting power are sustainable or practical. Experiments such as LobbyFi have demonstrated that bribes are largely unattractive for DAO governance and are only used in times of personal advantage (e.g., elections). An allocation of ~$200,000 for this experiment is unjustified, but we are not necessarily against experiments.

40

Treasury Delegation Round 2 Elections (Snapshot)
Gauntlet was somewhat surprised to see the proposition of this proposal given the lack of clear consensus from our perspective, but have voted nonetheless for candidates we feel have historically represented Uniswap interests and who demonstrate high potential to provide future impact in the Uniswap DAO.

41

Grow Uniswap on Plasma

Vote: For
While Gauntlet is generally not in favor of these proposals, we do feel that Plasma has demonstrated reasonable traction, specifically in DeFi and find the terms acceptable for a $250K grant to establish Uniswap’s presence on Plasma.