Proposal: Establish Uniswap Governance as “DUNI,” a Wyoming DUNA
Vote: For
Rationale: We voted in favor of this proposal’s corresponding Snapshot, see our rationale above. We have no outstanding questions or oppositions to voting in favor onchain.
Proposal: Unichain Co-Incentives Growth Management Plan
Vote: For
Rationale: We previously voted in favor of supporting the growth of USDS and sUSDS liquidity on Unichain. StableLab notes in their proposal over 2x growth of USDS on Unichain; it makes sense to capitalize on this growth through deploying incentives secured from the Spark ecosystem. We also appreciate the stricter KPIs and the performance-based payout for 3/4ths of the budget.
Proposal: Treasury Delegation Round 2 Elections
Vote: 25% SEED Gov, 25% Tané, 25% Avantgarde, 25% Proxy (self)
Rationale: We split our choice equally four ways between SEED Gov, Tané, Avantgarde, and ourselves. There are many great individuals and teams in this lineup, but we ultimately decided to select a few candidates who we believe are strong delegates and could benefit from amplification through a treasury delegation.
1 Like
Proposal: Grow Uniswap on Plasma
Vote: For
Rationale: Plasma represents a well-timed expansion of Uniswap into the emerging category of stablecoin-focused L2s. The proposal is structured responsibly, with clear tranche design and matching incentives from the Plasma team. This deployment positions Uniswap to capture stablecoin volume early, diversify beyond Ethereum mainnet, and test new DAO-to-chain collaboration models. We view the $250k discretionary allocation and $250k DAO-approved tranche as a measured, high-leverage step toward maintaining Uniswap’s leadership in stablecoin liquidity.
Proposal: Uniswap Community Proposal Factory
Vote: Against
Rationale: We see the side of the argument that allowing easier spamming of DAO governance proposals is an issue, and we also see the other POV that Uniswap has had an extremely low volume of proposals year-over-year. All things considered, we fall on the side that quorum is more of a pressing issue currently, and other mechanisms are already in place (albeit a bit informal) to enable small delegates to create proposals through sponsorships from larger delegates. This initiative could be useful in the future. Currently though, it seems to be patching a hole that doesn’t need immediate fixing.
Proposal: UNIfication
Vote: For
Rationale: Activating a fee-switch has been a long time coming, and we’re happy to see it finally come to fruition in a way that ties fees to UNI burn. The model is simple and creates a clear throughline from protocol usage to token value. Tying Unichain sequencer fees to this Uni burn creates another level of ecosystem cohesion in terms of incentives. We’re overall pleased with the proposal and its planned rollout.
Proposal: Strategic Renewal of Gnosis, Linea, and Mantle Deployments
Vote: For
Rationale: We’re in favor of renewing all three chains. We highly value data-driven decision-making, so we’re happy to see performance data being used to guide these proposed renewals. We agree with the framework outlined in the post and support renewing Mantle (relatively high TVL/onchain activity), Gnosis (maintaining status as the top DEX on the chain), and Linea (favorable R/R in terms of maintaining a market advantage).
Proposal: UNIfication
Vote: For
Rationale: We previously voted in favor of the Snapshot proposal. Our rationale still applies for its onchain counterpart.
Proposal: Strategic Renewal of Gnosis, Linea, and Mantle Deployments
Vote: For
Rationale: We previously voted in favor of the Snapshot proposal. Our rationale remains unchanged.