April Votes
The following reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @kaereste, @Sinkas, and @Manugotsuka, and it’s based on their combined research, fact-checking, and ideation.
[Snapshot] BoB Uniswap v3 Incentives Package - Voted FOR
We generally support all Uniswap EVM deployments and are inclined to support them with an onboarding package if their proposal makes sense. With a TVL of ~$240,000,000 at the time of writing and BoB providing $500,000 of incentives on its own, we are willing to vote in favor of an onboarding package.
[Snapshot] Establish Uniswap v4 Licensing Process - voted FOR
The UAC has been doing a great job stewarding the subdomain records and adding new Uniswap v3 deployments, and we think it makes sense to continue having the same process with v4 deployments as well.
We also believe granting the Uniswap Foundation a blanket Additional Use Grant license exemption to deploy v4 on target chains will enable them to pursue strategic deployments with greater speed and agility, which is often needed to establish Uniswap in new chains quickly.
[Tally] BoB Uniswap v3 Incentives Package - Voted FOR
We recently supported the proposal during the temp-check, and, given that nothing has changed, we will continue to support it during this subsequent on-chain vote.
[Snapshot] UAC Renewal S4 + [Snapshot] Approved Budgets Rebalancing (S4) - Voted FOR
We backed the Season 3 renewal and have been satisfied with the committee’s output. The new request—$320k in UNI for 8 months plus a $50k operations buffer—represents a larger commitment than last season. However, the added hours, the committee’s broadened scope, and its decision to run the S4 through year-end 2025 more than justify the increase.
In our view, the UAC has become an essential operational bridge between governance decisions and day-to-day execution, handling everything from cross-chain deployments to incentive distribution and ENS management. The extra month, higher hour-cap, and modest discretionary fund should help it keep pace with an expanding ecosystem and the transition to the V4.
As an extension of our support for the renewal of the UAC for another season, we also voted in favor of the rebalancing of the accounts.
[Tally] Establish Uniswap v4 Licensing Process - Voted FOR
We previously supported this proposal during the temp-check phase, so considering that no changes were made to it, we decided to extend our support during the onchain vote as well.
[Snapshot] Treasury Delegation - Round 2 - Voted FOR
We voted AGAINST the proposal.
We are generally opposed to delegating tokens from the treasury, especially if that voting power is given to already active delegates solely to avoid difficulties in reaching a quorum. While we understand the frustration of needing to rally multiple stakeholders to achieve quorum, this reality in DAOs is a feature, not a bug.
There are multiple reasons why we are against the idea of treasury delegation:
- There is a significant conflict of interest, as existing delegates are voting to delegate voting power to themselves.
- Existing delegates derive their voting power, in whole or in part, from the token holders they represent. That means token-holders can, at any time, re-delegate their voting power away from delegates who no longer represent their interests or are no longer active. By using the treasury to delegate voting power, we circumvent that whole dynamic.
- While the premise is that the additional voting power will assist in achieving quorum, there is no way to ensure it is only used in cases where quorum is difficult to achieve, at least not with the proposed approach.
- While the governance risk is similar to that of reducing quorum, delegating from the treasury creates extra overhead and additional risk. If we are to accept the governance risk, then reducing the quorum is a more straightforward option.
All in all, we understand the challenges associated with meeting quorum, but we are opposed to using treasury delegation as a means to mitigate them. Ideally, the difficulty is reduced by attracting more and more actively involved delegates. Given that it’s a longer-term solution, we’re open to discussing ideas for how we could address a high quorum without having to use the treasury to increase the voting power of current delegates.
For example, a solution we can consider is creating a setup inspired by Optimism’s Anti-Capture Commission (ACC), where we would delegate voting power to a multisig controlled by a few active delegates. That multisig would only be mobilised to vote on proposals that are not contentious, but are not reaching quorum easily. The exact details can be discussed and refined, but we view this as a more suitable solution to the problem at hand.
[Snapshot] Scaling V4 and Supporting Unichain - Voted FOR
We appreciate the efforts of GFX Labs in spearheading the deployment of Uniswap on various chains. We believe that having third parties build businesses around official Uniswap deployments is a net positive for the Uniswap ecosystem in general. @AbdullahUmar detailed explanation of the process, along with GFX Labs’ clarification of the licensing terms, alleviated most of our concerns regarding the blanket license approval. However, we would like to support the request for more usage data regarding the Oku frontend.
[Snapshot] Analytics Hub for Uniswap’s Revitalization and Growth Program & Four Chains for Analytics Hub for Uniswap’s Revitalization and Growth Program - voted AGAINST in both
First, we’d like to thank the StableLab team for the time and effort put into this proposal. The Forse dashboards you’ve built are clear, well‑structured, and helpful for anyone tracking the first round of incentive campaigns.
We have nothing against Forse—it’s a solid tool—but we haven’t seen tangible outcomes that would help us justify funding integrations for four more chains. Before extending the coverage for additional chains it would be good to understand better what value does the current dashboard bring and how it can be used most effectively. If usage grows and the dashboard proves more value to the DAO, we’d be happy to revisit the idea in the future.
[Tally] UAC Renewal S4 & Approved Budgets Rebalancing (S4) - Voted FOR in both
Following our support during the temp-check votes and given that nothing has changed in the proposals since then, we have also decided to vote in favor of the UAC renewal and budget rebalancing during the onchain vote.