Thanks for writing this up! It’s an exciting proposal.
I think this proposal is a nice iteration in several ways over the one that @guil-lambert and I wrote up. However, I am going to focus on where I’d like to see continued work before I would support it.
I believe this proposal shares the same weakness that the proposal Guillaume and I had… it does not address what to do with any fees collected.
I’ve come to the strong belief that any fees collected by the protocol should be autonomously distributed in a programmatic way. There is a big design space in what that could look like but the main point is that they should not simply collect to a treasury where they are then arbitrarily distributed based on later token votes. My reasons for this belief are the following:
-
Token holders have a very poor track record in managing protocol treasuries via discrete voting. It has not proven to be efficient or effective.
-
Ideologically, this is much more aligned with traditional crypto ethos of immutable, forever software. Contra some other commenters, I strongly disagree with the view that the Uniswap protocol is a business… it absolutely is not a business. It is an autonomous piece of software, it doesn’t have employees, it can’t go bankrupt, it doesn’t have revenue and expenses. Protocols are a revolutionary new entity type and we need to think of them as such.
-
Although we would still need to be thoughtful about regulatory and tax considerations, the autonomous redistribution should be a much more vanilla tax / regulatory position (i.e. this is the same as how ETH staking works).
I think this proposal is a step in the right direction but the crucial piece I outlined above needs to be addressed before I can support it.