True… Every man fur himself makes the world really gets more rotten lol
2 Likes
In the beginning there might has been an idea in the blockchain industry to take back the power from the bankers and hegde fonds managers and give it back to the people. And the more this industry develops it comes to light that this is the same shit as it has always been. There is really no difference between the old money industry and the new one called crypto. This is mankind. This is the way people are.
3 Likes
Now I just wanted to say my two cents:
The cutoff date is more than fair because if it was announced say 1 day before it was going to take the snapshot, only a group a people (could be a couple hundred, thousand, million idk) that understand crypto would abuse the hell out of the snapshot since there is no limits to the amount of accounts you create or the amount of private keys people can generate.
Keeping it random like this implies that no one else had a much better chance than you (now I know the devs could have told people, but I’m thinking of this in general with billions of people rather than just a couple of individuals). In the banking world, those with insider trading would be able to do way more (continue to buy until the date to sell) but here, they are limited to 400 UNI each.
I believe this is fair due to the fact that there has been so much time to use this protocol and, to be honest, this has way more risk like every other dex there is. If you had barely come to Uniswap, I can infer maybe 2 things. 1) you are new and that you barely stumbled upon Uniswap but still needed to research and understand what it is (DYOR). or 2) you have been here for awhile and have used other services until you stumbled upon Uniswap and either skipped it or barely missed the time.
If you missed the time, I feel sorry for you since yes you were the closest to getting the UNI but missed it. But couldn’t you say the same about people who didn’t purchase or missed the bottom. Asking to extend the date of the snapshot is like asking any asset to go back to their bottom so you can buy in.
I, personally, have been using crypto for less than a year and found uniswap in the spring-summer. As a new user, I saw the risk of putting my funds into something that I might not get anything back but still took it anyways. That is why my wallet received 400 UNI. And I didn’t expect anything from using this protocol and no one really should in crypto since this is where you are responsible for all you do here with no safety net.
You may disagree with me but that is fine but I don’t see how it’s suppose to be fair, could you offer a better way it could be fair without any abuse. Until then this is what I think about this.
3 Likes
Wow, we’ve had a lot of discussion! Isn’t governance fun?
Reading through all of the comments I think we’re losing sight of the intended proposal.
Here’s the original proposal-
I need to add a con I missed: The possibility that the distribution could be gamed by the small group of people who had knowledge of the distribution prior to the announcement (Auditors and the like)
To minimize that risk I would tweak the original proposal to restrict the eligible addresses to those that were older than 9/1 and limit the distribution to just 400/wallet instead of the dynamic allocation
It seems we have some common themes that need to be addressed here as well so we don’t lose our civility and keep the discussion on track
THEMES
On the dissent front most of the comments seem to be along these lines of the following:
- Don’t understand that the proposed adjusted snapshot would be from the initial cutoff of 9/1 to the announcement date
and thus impossible to game - Don’t understand that this proposal is not calling for minting new UNI, just allocating the unclaimed UNI after 3 months to this small batch of users.
and thus not dramatically changing the amount of UNI in circulation - I got something free an valuable if anyone else get’s any it’s going to make the thing I just got for free worth less!
“I don’t think the pie will ever get any bigger so I have to protect what I have” - These people just want a hand out! If they really wanted UNI they could buy it or farm it!
Most seem to be mad about the proposal, which is strange since they all just received a “Handout” and they seem to think that the receipt of UNI will mean that they won’t buy or farm UNI - These people don’t actually believe in decentralization so how could the help govern a protocol?
We currently have nothing at stake and yet here we are, assisting in the governance process
In summary, (Sorry this is so long) I’m floored by the engagement, both positive and not. I just wanted to encourage us to keep it civil, and productive. I know this would have to be picked up by a delegate, so the best thing we can do now is sort through the issues so it’s ready to be voted on if/when it gets selected.
6 Likes
that kind of farming tricks to get more UNI it can be prevented if they will add some stricts rules in making wallet in uniswap like if the system detect that they are farming then the admin should ban the cheaters…like other wallet,they have strict rules to get free token in order to prevent the cheaters they strictly only allow one account per ip address.,so that it can prevent the making dummy wallets
1 Like
If this is to go through, I would only find it fair if they are locked and released within time. It is definitely not fair to Uniswap users who sold their UNI at $1-5 because of uncertainty in the price, or for those who are buying at the current prices, for suddenly others getting free UNI which they can proceed to dump on loyal Uniswap holders at $8-10 dollars when they receive it, which I see very possible. If there are unclaimed tokens and we can distribute THOSE among users, there needs to be some kind of regulation to avoid these users go and take advantage of the current prices. As a Uniswap holder I feel less incentivized to keep my UNI or purchase more knowing that people will be receiving UNI at the prices we’ve helped maintain and will most likely plummet the price. I’m not really supportive of anymore Airdrops at all. People will keep coming up saying that for some reason it’s not fair they didn’t get free tokens.
I support you in this regard 
5 Likes
I support you in this regard
3 Likes
This could easily be done. Reward the users who used Uniswap 9/1/20 to 9/15 now with 400 tokens each. These people did not know about the airdrop and were supporting the project as all the others who received their tokens.
Than there is no way to scam or trick the system.
Give them the tokens only if they actively claim them.
I don’t think that there will be many people who will actively do this.
And than burn the unclaimed tokens or make another round of an airdrop and once again spread the tokens between the people who used Uniswap before 9/15.
2 Likes
I really do not know where the problem is. The people that received their Airdrop tokens say :
NO WAY, don’t give the Airdrop to the people who missed the snapshot and traded at Uniswap from 9/1 till the announcement.
WHY? Are you of the opinion that these people aren’t worth to get the worth Airdrop? Where is the problem with it? If I would have received the Airdrop and others would have told me that it’s unfair and I know that there will be a lot of unclaimed tokens I would say: give them what the deserve. They are still early adopters and they are part of the community.
Why this malevolence? You want us to go because we say that the snapshot was unfair?
This is my honest opinion: I thought and still think after my first trade that this is a great project and I was willing to use it in the future when the transaction fees are lower. I am trading with the few money I have and I can’t afford transaction fees of 10 % and more.
My harsh post about the blockchain industry is my honest opinion and you see it everywhere in the whole blockchain community. And if I see this discussion here I could get the impression that I might be correct with my evaluation.
4 Likes
because people will spam uniswap just to claim tokens. not legit users
1 Like
you missed out. end of. It was for legitimate users
1 Like
That’s exactly what I meant. No arguments. What you mean is the following: “Shut up. Get out of here.”
2 Likes
I will do so…Byebye to the community.
This is incorrect. The uniswap team would have had to inform lawyers, other exchanges such as Binance and Coinbase, etc. The news would have been slowly circulating among crypto insiders for weeks up to the announcement date. Some of these individuals will have created a ton of wallets to try to benefit from a proposal like this after UNI went live. It sucks leaving people out, but there’s no way to extend the cutoff fairly.
2 Likes
because what makes you so special? There will always be people missing out. It was decided on september 1st. You won’t be missed with this attitude.
1 Like
If you are saying claiming tokens is spamming, then you have already spammed the whole Ethereum blockchain on 17th Sep.
If you mean people will create fake addresses to claim unis, then you are wrong, because they would need to time travel to 1st Sep.
All users prior to the announcement are legitimate to claim unis, older users and LPs deserve more, but recent users are also part of this growing community.
6 Likes
sheeeshhh…why are y’all so desperate for the airdrop? there were many valuable airdrops in the past that made mad gains, even I missed those. Move on!
1 Like
I do not agree. I am buying Uni tokens from my own pocket to add to my bag because I believe wholeheartedly in this project. I do not think it’s fair for people to get free tokens at this point in time after all we have invested into it, most people will go and dump their tokens on us bringing the price down . If you want to reap the benefits of UNI, but the tokens and participate in the community
You can see all Uniswap transactions from 9/1 to 9/15 on Etherscan. How should it be possible to fake them ? If this is possible we should stop all blockchain projects immediately.