Retroactive Airdrop Excludes Proxy Contract Users (e.g. Dharma, Matcha, etc.)

People opposed to this don’t want less than 10k addresses to be rewarded for supporting Uniswap. Meanwhile, not many complaints about the 12k addresses that never had a successful transaction and were rewarded.

It will be a greedy start to Uniswap governance if this is rejected.

6 Likes

Though I’m supportive of the spirit behind this suggestion, I fear that allowing arbitrary submission of addresses by any means (i.e. “dispute resolution”) is ultimately game-able, one way or another, and will add needless controversy to the vote for the proposal.

Sybil-resistance is not so simple to build into an application and it’s not so simple to prove that someone is not an arbitrageur.

Moreover, I would argue that folks who fall into the “edge-case” category of not having a project that will vouch for them in this process most likely developed their own proxy contracts to take actions on Uniswap. It seems a bit unlikely to me that those users wouldn’t have already had the technical acumen to use Uniswap directly and, in turn, gotten a UNI payout elsewhere. I would be surprised if there are more than 10 people in the world whose first and only interaction with Uniswap was through Solidity code.

5 Likes

The Application Period has started and projects are welcome to submit applications to be included in this proposal in this thread

10 Likes

All valid points and I trust all projects will do their due diligence to ensure all users are made whole. Thanks again for your time and consideration :pray:

3 Likes

Completely agree with the proposal. Dharma must have introduced numerous newbies to the Uniswap world minus the complexities of Metamask. Dharma users and other similar projects rightfully should have had the airdrop in the first place. It is disappointing that scams and rug pulls got allocation of the initial UNI but not legitimate users that actually provided liquidity and paid fees by trading on Uniswap using the Dharma wallets. It will be a very disappointing end if Dharma and similar project users are not given the opportunity to be part of this early adoption grant.

7 Likes

I can understand your perspective, not sure if you are a user, but if you used Dharma you will know that they are as transparent as glass. Yes agreed the ‘No gas’ looks a bit gimmicky which I think can be improved on, all the fee are as transparent as they get. They list the slippage and clearly state that they will take the remainder from the slippage. Mainstream users will mostly prefer this over having to see and adjust various metrics in metamask to be able to get their trades through especially in this exploding gas market. So I would suggest you give Dharma a chance before being critical.

4 Likes

Sounds sensible. I have asked the Parachute token guys to have a read to make sure their ParJar Uniswap users are included.

They have had a great in telegram bot which people have been using for a while now so it’s a real shame all those users missing out.

4 Likes

How about KNC token holders? There aren’t that many of us, and UNI and KNC are in the same business and Kyber calls on UNI reserves for liquidity.
Plus, UNI may be putting Kyber out of business pretty soon. Give us a parachute amirite?

2 Likes

I assume dharma & co users will want to have a proposal for quadratic voting in place before this this is decided.

Quadradic will works kinda like this:
If you have 10 gov token = 10 votes
whale has 1000 gov token but only = 100 votes
superwhale 1.000.000gov only = 10.000 votes

Dharma & Co give a user experience to retail. So retail should be heard in this (and further) matters. Opinions of someone who is 100x richer must not be 100x cleverer.

Therefore I urge everyone interested in this matter to push the discussions and implementation of quadratic voting.

edit: typo

3 Likes

I used 1inch exchange to make my swaps and I am not sure if the project owner will post in the application thread, so can I Simply put out my transaction hashes that shows that I interacted with Uniswap via delegated call?

1 Like

Mooniswap / 1inch Users who provided Liq - Which mostly fed through Uniswap should not be penalized for doing it. All provided adoption and tremendous amount of money into the digital asset space.
Lets see if this is acceptable -

Once done - Binance and the rest will list 1INCH / MOONI tokens as well for sure which will make back the Airdrop distribution anyway.

1 Like

I think it is not more than fair to reward the Dharma users. It sole purpose is to interact with the the uniswapmarket and provide a buyers sellers market gor uniswap. It’s like another walletadress.

For UNI bagholders who are against this proposal for totally understandable, rational self-interest in not diluting the value of UNI, here’s something to consider:

What do you think will happen if this proposal gets denied - how likely is it that Dharma and other third party platforms will continue to direct their user’s volumes to uniswap, after being told by the uniswap community that their users don’t matter? Sure there are some token pairs that can only be traded on uniswap but for many of the more liquid pairs there’s nothing to stop platforms from directing trading volume to another DEX instead.

Uniswap is a fantastic protocol and money lego, but its true value comes from the integrations with other money legos in the ethereum ecosystem. Ensuring that the users and developers of these third party platforms feel like a valued part of the uniswap community would be a rational investment in the future of uniswap and its token.

4 Likes

24h have gone. Any update on the submission? Did the application period started?

1 Like

Application is here:

2 Likes

I support this proposal.

Im going to tell you my experience, i wanted to use Uniswap back in April of this year, i used it 2 times but transactions failed, something happened everytime i had no idea, so i used 1inch.exchange as a way to use Uniswap and in that way all transactions went throught. So they are both allies. A lot of activity was facilitated this way and a lot of users used Uniswap this way.

Thanks for creating all of this, its exciting!

6 Likes

I find it funny DEX aggregators think they can make threats as if someone would use an aggregator that ignored uniswap

4 Likes

If you used Uniswap even once, even if the transaction failed, you got your 400 UNI drop. So, no.

1 Like

Just a thought, but what if we gave out 300 tokens to these users instead of 400. I think it’s reasonable as users who use Uniswap thru a proxy are still supporters of Uniswap, but are not necessarily as committed or ready to be involved with governance. I think this would be a fair compromise, as it still allows these users to get $UNI but still rewarding direct users of Uniswap who are more likely to be involved in governance.

2 Likes

What is the difference between interacting with Uniswap direct vs going through a services like Matcha, Paraswap or Dharma? Do the users that interacted with Uniswap through proxies not pay the same fees and supported Uniswap? I think proxy services make it much easier for newbies to get into this space and this should not be penalised. But this is just my opinion. On another note @nadav_dharma it looks like there is a fair few projects that replied to the retroactive airdrop application. When is the cut off to have the proposal drafted?

1 Like