On behalf of ScopeLift, I’m against the introduction of a Veto Council. Such a measure is extremely centralizing and should be looked at as a last ditch, temporary solutio. While some DAOs are in fact facing such a situation now, and while many more (including eventually Uniswap) will face it in the future if we don’t take proper steps to align and incentivize token holders and delegates, it is currently not the case.
I’m open to the idea of proposal staking, and other DAOs are experimenting with this (notably ENS), however such a solution is ultimately just a speedbump for a serious attacker. Any bond requirement placed upon proposers would be much less than what a genuine attacker would be able to gain should they take control of Governance.
For now, Uniswap DAO is secure, and should not accept a centralizing, risky hack. Instead we should focus on sustainable long term solutions, like delegate compensation, UniStaker adoption, and governance minimization.