Growth: We see great potential for Uniswap and look forward to helping the protocol grow as much as possible
Cross chain deployments and v4 initiatives: We see great use cases in the future for growth in the areas of cross chain deployments and v4. Of course, there are many other avenues but we have found interest and expertise in these.
Transparency: Clear communication with votes and explanations of reasoning
Delegate Statement:
As a team of dedicated governance enthusiasts who have been in the crypto governance space for over two years now, we’re excited to officially create this thread to organize our voting presence and communications for the last 6 months. Having already been active voters for over half a year on Uniswap, we believe this protocol is uniquely positioned and has some of the strongest and most intelligent community and foundation members we’ve seen across all of defi!
Our primary goal is to use the knowledge we have learned in the past to help grow UNI and its community. We’ve been UNI community members for over years now and are excited to continue as official recognized delegates!
Conflicts of Interest & Resolution:
Abstain from the vote if a situation arises a conflict of interest, and clearly state on forums the conflict.
We voted FOR: We are supportive of this initiative to get more delegates to the threshold where they can propose votes. These delegates (note: We are included as one of them) we believe all deserve some more delegation and should hopefully make getting to quorum easier in the future.
We voted Lower PT from 2.5M UNI to 1M UNI: We are supportive of this lower threshold as it allows for more qualified delegated to submit votes. Happy to see it decreased even more to incorporate some of the other recognized delegates as we don’t think spam will be an issue even at 250k/500k votes delegated.
We voted YES: We’ve been in chats with the Rootstock team now for a few months and think this is worthy a deeper dive. Some questions regarding accountability for proposed rewards still need to be answered but they are worth diving deeper into.
We voted FOR: Thanks to @DAOstrat.C and @AbdullahUmar for spearheading this. We are voting in line with our prior snapshot vote. By decreasing the threshold, more delegates will be able to sponsor proposals in the future. Special thanks to @Getty for helping us with the techs and custom ABI when proposing this vote.
We voted FOR: We have been in communication with the IOV Labs team for months now and glad to see the proposal change over time to now. With the recent implementation of the Wormhole bridge as well as liquidity incentives and Oku Trade front end adoption, we are in favor of this proposal. As apart of the new season of the accountability committee, the topic of accountability for the promised liquidity incentives will be of focus.
We voted $500k for all; $750k for BSC and Blast: The baseline amount we voted for was $500k as we believe it’s a nice medium ground where operational expenses will be significantly less exhaustive and enough funding to make a noticeable difference. The increased amounts for BSC was since the ecosystem there is very mature, we will need more to make the same impact. Similar reasoning was for Blast, but emphasis on getting in early and hopefully getting and maintaining a first mover advantage over time.
We voted YES: We see no red flags here and are in favor of this v3 launch. We look forward to working with them over the next few months. Some considerations such as bridge deployment details will need to be honed out by onchain vote.
We voted FOR: This vote was a “long time coming” and we’re happy to see it finally getting voted on. These chains with new v3 deployments should also have v2 deployed and should be a rather technically easy job for the teams. Thanks @eek637 for spearheading.
We voted FOR: This is a slam dunk win for Uniswap’s deployments across these chains. It opens the door to more incentives in the future and keeps Uniswap in the news with attracting more liquidity to these chains. As apart of the deployment accountability committee, we’ll work diligently to get these funds distributed to where they need to go.
As for future funding, hopefully Merkl (and Oku one time fee for the year) will be less % of total costs. Nonetheless, this trial period should give a good idea of liquidity stickiness and will be very informative for a more indepth continuous program down the road.
We voted YES, Upgrade the Factory Owner: We’re incredibly excited to see this upgrade and spark the future growth of the protocol! We’ve been in support of this immediately and look forward to the contracts being fully audited. After a few days of fruitful GovSwap discussions, there are a few points I would still like to be addressed but overall are in huge support.
We voted Accept amendment: Super exciting to see tangible positive outcomes and votes come out of the GovSwap events. As voiced here, we are in favor of this as it lets people have more opinions and think deeper into their concerns while also shipping out products quicker, knowing thar errors/flaws can be changed down the road.
We voted Launch Working Group: Overall, we think this discussion is something that needs to happen sooner or later. The only concern we have on this is that this might be a little too soon given all the legal things that happened recently with the DUNA legislation. After the 8 weeks, it might be smart to gather what has been learned and wait for a little while before deploying fund as the DAO sorts out the legal and tax ramifications of this (if they haven’t yet).
We voted Incentivize $500k: Super excited to get started with the optimistic snapshots for these proposals looking to deploy on Uniswap! We think the $500k amount here is justifed as with the new launch of the chain, we have a limited time and chance to make a big impact for Uniswap and this will ensure we have significant incentives to bootstrap Uniswap liquidity there.
We voted Update Process: Seeing the recent on chain proposals regarding deploy Uni v3 across these different chains all being largely in support, we believe this update streamlines the deployment process the most efficiently.
We voted FOR: We are in favor of chains having Uniswap deployed across them as well as receiving a meaningful incentive package to go with relatively across the board. This makes sense.
We voted 404DAO, FranklinDAO, JoJo, GFX (double weight): We voted for these groups because:
@404DAO: Has become very active in Uniswap recently across community calls and forum discussions. They have also been contributing to a lot of recent governance initiatives and we are confident about the team.
@pennblockchain (FranklinDAO): They have been around for almost 3 years now and we think the team is very well suited and prepped to take on their first committee role.
@_JoJo: Has been great to work with on Uniswap-Arbitrum related matters and Uniswap would benefit greatly from him getting more and more involved in the future.
@GFXlabs: Vote weighted double here because @Getty has been incredibly helpful with Accountability Committee related matters and is always super responsive and willing to problem solve. Paper is also incredibly diligent and the whole has been great to work with across various protocols.
We voted For: In line with our prior votes and communication for each individual proposal. Glad to see these all bundled together for operation efficiency.
We voted For: In line with our prior support, this should be a great way to start and formalize the discussions around treasury management and should hopefully make way for some deliverable outcomes in the future once legal entities are sorted and set up.
We voted For & Fund 1 million UNI (Original): We thought about this very long and hard and tldr is that we thought the DEF and its legal battles in the future are worthy of this extraordinary funing from the DAO. This is why we voted yes in the first poll. Seeing a large support in the second options poll for the 300k/500k option, we originally preferred the larger 500,000 as we thought anything in the 500k-1m range would be adeuqate, and near the end are in favor with the 1m option that ended with substantial traction as well.
We voted Yes Proceed: We are in favor of this trial program that has come out of the working group and believe the time is appropriate to start discussions around this topic.