Voting Actions December 2nd - 6th
Proposal: [TEMP CHECK] Uniswap DAO Principles
Vote: For
Reasoning: We are in favour of having collective principles for Uniswap DAO as they ensure a respectful, fair and encouraging ecosystem for all.
1 Like
Voting Actions January 6th - 10th
Proposal: Incentive Package for Sonic
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for this initiative, we voted in favour.
Proposal: Scale Uniswap Liquidity on Celo
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for this initiative, we voted in favour.
Voting Actions January 13th - 17th
Proposal: Uniswap DAO Principles
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for this initiative, we voted in favour.
Proposal: Governance Proposal - Adopt The SEAL Safe Harbor Agreement
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for this initiative, we voted in favour.
Voting Actions February 17th - 21st
Proposal: [Temp Check] Uniswap Delegate Reward Initiative - Cycle 3
Vote: Yes
Reasoning: We believe the Delegate Reward Initiative is effectively contributing to active participation in the DAO. For this reason, we voted in favour.
Voting Actions February 24th - 28th
Proposal: [Temp Check] Uniswap Unleashed
Vote: For
Reasoning: Although we recognise this funding proposal requests a significant amount, we believe the Uniswap Foundation is a core contributor to the Uniswap DAO, contributing positively and effectively to the ecosystem and DAO growth. For this reason, we voted in favour of the proposal.
We strongly encourage the UF to continue sharing transparent reports on their use of funds and funded initiatives.
Proposal: [Temp Check] Unichain and Uniswap v4 Liquidity Incentives
Vote: For
Reasoning: Considering the growing competition in the DEX market, we recognise the need to take a strong approach for the initial growth of Uniswap v4 and Unichain. Although this proposal requires a significant amount of UNI, we are confident that the Uniswap Foundation and Gauntlet proposed an incentives strategy based on data analysis and performance optimisations with a long-term view. For this reason, we voted in favour.
Proposal: Uniswap Delegate Reward Initiative - Cycle 3
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for this initiative, given its success in its previous cycles.
Voting Actions March 17th - 21st
Proposal: [Temp Check] Saga Uniswap v3 Liquidity Incentives
Vote: Against
Reasoning: We’re supportive of expanding Uniswap across multiple chains. However, we believe incentives should be deployed carefully. Ideally, we’d like to see the learnings from previous incentive campaigns (e.g., analytics on best and worst performing pools from the latest Forse Analytics update) applied to future campaigns.
Proposal: Unichain and Uniswap v4 Liquidity Incentives
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for this initiative, we voted in favour.
Proposal: Uniswap Unleashed
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for this initiative, we voted in favour.
Voting Actions March 31st - April 4th
Proposal: [Temp Check] Treasury Delegation Round 2
Vote: For
Reasoning: In light of the positive impact of this initiative in its first iteration, we support its renewal for a second round.
Voting Actions April 14th - 18th
Proposal: [TEMP CHECK] BoB Uniswap v3 Incentives Package
Vote: For $375k
Reasoning: We support the deployment of Uniswap v3 across multiple chains and believe BoB is an interesting opportunity to approach the Bitcoin ecosystem.
Proposal: [TEMP CHECK] Establish Uniswap v4 Licensing Process
Vote: For
Reasoning: We agree we should consider the BUSL licence a competitive advantage for Uniswap. We support granting a blanket exemption to the Uniswap Foundation as we believe that’s an effective way forward to deploy Uniswap v4 on promising chains.
Voting Actions April 28th - May 2nd
Proposal: Establish Uniswap v4 Licensing Process
Vote: Abstain
Reasoning: We are voting to abstain to avoid conflicts of interest.
Proposal: UAC Renewal S4
Vote: Abstain
Reasoning: We are voting to abstain to avoid conflicts of interest.
Proposal: Approved Budgets Rebalancing (S4)
Vote: Abstain
Reasoning: We are voting to abstain to avoid conflicts of interest.
Proposal: [Temp Check/Revised] Treasury Delegation Round 2
Vote: Abstain
Reasoning: We are voting to abstain to avoid conflicts of interest.
Proposal: [TEMP CHECK] Scaling V4 and Supporting Unichain
Vote: Abstain
Reasoning: We are voting to abstain to avoid conflicts of interest.
Proposal: BoB Uniswap v3 Incentives Package
Vote: For
Reasoning: We’re supportive of exploring the Bitcoin market through incentives on BOB.
Voting Actions May 5th - 9th
Proposal: [Temp Check] Analytics Hub for Uniswap’s Revitalization and Growth Program
Vote: Abstain
Reasoning: We’re generally supportive of Forse as a tool and are satisfied with the results of its initial analysis. However, with the exception of Unichain, we are unsure of the utility of an in-depth analysis of the proposed chains due to their low popularity or less successful campaigns. For this reason, we voted to abstain.
Proposal: Four Chains for Analytics Hub for Uniswap’s Revitalization and Growth Program
Vote: Unichain, Linea, Zksync, Polygon zkEVM
Reasoning: Should additional analysis over the growth program be approved, we believe these to be the most useful chains and campaigns to analyse. Unichain is interesting because of the key relevance to the Uniswap ecosystem and a unique incentive program approved, which is different from the one conducted by the Growth Program. The others are interesting because of their less successful campaign outcomes, contrasting expectations based on their popularity.
Proposal: UAC Renewal S4
Vote: Abstain
Reasoning: We voted to abstain to avoid conflicts of interest.
Proposal: Approved Budgets Rebalancing (S4)
Vote: Abstain
Reasoning: We voted to abstain to avoid conflicts of interest.
Voting Actions May 12th - 16th
Proposal: Scaling V4 and Supporting Unichain
Vote: Abstain
Reasoning: We are in favour of the proposal as we believe having Uniswap v4 and Unichain integrated in independent frontends is critical for the growth of the ecosystem and Oku is very well positioned to provide this service. However, we voted to abstain to avoid conflicts of interest.
Voting Actions May 18th - 23rd
Proposal: Uniswap Accountability Committee S4 Elections
Vote: Equal split among all candidates
Reasoning: We decided to abstain from the vote to avoid conflicts of interest. As no “abstain” option was available, we equally split our vote among all candidates.
Voting Actions June 2nd - 6th
Proposal: Scaling V4 and Supporting Unichain
Vote: For
Reasoning: Having Uniswap v4 and Unichain integrated in frontends independent from Uniswap Labs is critical for accessibility, and Oku is very well positioned to provide this service. For these reasons, we voted in favour.
1 Like
Voting Actions June 16th - 20th
Proposal: Trial run a Technical Advisory Board (TAB)
Vote: Against
Reasoning: Increasing the technical awareness of the larger delegate cohort is a fundamental and valuable goal. However, we have some reservations about the proposed TAB’s current scope and structure. Considering the limited current workload, there’s a risk that a formal, multi-member board might introduce more overhead than value at this stage. For this reason, we voted against the proposal in its current format.
Proposal: Uniswap Unichain - USDS and sUSDS Co-Incentives Growth Management Plan
Vote: For
Reasoning: Unichain is focused on DeFi and financial use-cases. Given Sky’s strong positioning, we believe it to be a prime partner for Uniswap in growing its stablecoin market on Unichain. For this reason, we voted in favour.
Voting Actions July 14th - 24th
Proposal: [TEMP CHECK] - Etherlink Co-incentives Proposal
Vote: Do not approve
Reasoning: We believe Etherlink hasn’t sufficient traction currently to justify co-incentives.
Voting Actions August 11th - 15th
Proposal: Uniswap Delegate Reward Initiative - Cycle 4
Vote: For
Rationale: The program has clearly succeeded in bolstering delegate participation and sustaining governance momentum—and we support its renewal for Cycle 4. Additionally, we believe the proposed enhancements strike the right balance between encouraging active contributions and deepening alignment with the DAO’s values.
Voting Actions August 25th - 29th
Proposal: Establish Uniswap Governance as “DUNI,” a Wyoming DUNA
Vote: For
Reasoning: Establishing Uniswap Governance as DUNI is an important step forward for the DAO, enabling it to expand its actions. We believe the Uniswap Foundation researched the topic in depth, and we are confident that they are proposing the framework that proved to be the best fit for Uniswap. For these reasons, we voted in favour.
Voting Actions September 1st - 5th
Proposal: Establish Uniswap Governance as “DUNI,” a Wyoming DUNA
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for the proposal, we voted in favour. Establishing Uniswap Governance as DUNI is an important step forward for the DAO, enabling it to expand its actions. We believe the Uniswap Foundation researched the topic in depth, and we are confident that they are proposing the framework that proved to be the best fit for Uniswap.
Proposal: Launching Uniswap v3 on Ronin with co-incentives
Vote: Do not deploy incentives
Reasoning: While we recognise the historical highs of adoption Ronin was able to achieve, we believe $500k worth of incentives is too expensive considering the chain’s current metrics. Even more so, considering that incentives distributed over the last year have not surpassed the $250k budget per chain. For these reasons, we voted against - we remain open to reconsideration should a proposal with a lower budget be submitted.
Proposal: GLI — Treasury delegation Round 2
Vote: For
Reasoning: We strongly support treasury delegation. While we do not see this as a long-term solution, it is a necessary step to increase the voting supply to a level that allows ordinary proposals to reach quorum reliably.
Proposal: GLI — Incentivised Delegation Vaults
Vote: For
Reasoning: We view this as an experimental but promising initiative. Running a 12-month pilot with Event Horizon seems sensible to test its effectiveness. For this reason, we voted in favour.
Proposal: Unichain Co-Incentives Growth Management Plan
Vote: For
Reasoning: Continuing our support for this initiative, we voted in favour.
Voting Actions September 29th - October 3rd
Proposal: Treasury Delegation Round 2 Elections
Vote: 25% KPK, 75% Arana Digital
Reasoning: According to the self-voting policy, we directed 25% of the votes to ourselves. We decided to direct all the remaining votes to Arana Digital due to their strong commitment to Uniswap DAO - they positively contributed to the ecosystem via voting, as well as participating in or leading working groups, committees and other initiatives.
1 Like
Voting Actions October 6th - 10th
Proposal: Grow Uniswap on Plasma
Vote: Allocate $250k
Reasoning: Plasma is a fast-growing ecosystem, backed by Tether. Considering its backers, its specific focus on stablecoins, and its success in attracting major DeFi protocols and their users on the chain, we believe Plasma represents an interesting opportunity for growth for Uniswap. For these reasons, we voted to allocate UNI incentives to it.