Governance Proposal - Scale Uniswap Liquidity on Celo

[pepo]

I have voted AGAINST this proposal, you can read my rationale in my delegation thread:

@pepo

Proposal: [TEMP CHECK] Scale Uniswap Liquidity on Celo

After reviewing the Stabila Foundation’s proposal and the feedback from other delegates, I am voting AGAINST the proposal.

Value Proposition:

• Scale Uniswap’s liquidity on Celo (effective upon their transition to L2 in Q1 2025).
• $355k budget:
  • $250k for a co-incentives campaign on Celo’s L2 (+$500k contribution from their side).
  • $105k for Oku deployment and maintenance (1 year).

Main Concerns:

1. Suspicious Activity: Evidence suggests patterns that align with wash trading.
2. Lack of Organic Volume: Concerns raised by Blockworks question the authenticity of the activity on the chain.
3. Unnecessary Oku Support: The requirement for Oku seems unjustified given that the chain is already supported on the Labs frontend.

While this proposal appears promising on the surface, it is fundamentally flawed, with underlying issues that conflict with the values I uphold within the DAO and cannot be tolerated. The Stabila Foundation has been provided with all the necessary information to address these concerns, yet their response has consisted solely of vanity metrics that fail to justify the activity on their chain.