[RFC] - Supporting Tally’s Continued Development and Enhancements for Uniswap DAO Governance

Requests for Comment
1

Summary

Tally has been actively supporting Uniswap DAO since December 2020, less than 3 months after the UNI token was launched in September 2020. We are excited to continue building for the Uniswap DAO by enhancing the governance experience and rolling out key developments to further strengthen the Uniswap DAO’s onchain governance infrastructure. To continue providing these services and pursue future improvements, we are requesting $250,000 annually for 2 years.

Motivation

Tally is the leading interface for Uniswap DAO’s onchain governance. Over the past 6 months, 75% of Uniswap DAO’s proposals were created on Tally with an average of 55.2% of onchain votes being cast on Tally.

Tally has been deeply engaged with the Uniswap DAO, providing essential governance infrastructure that has enabled its success. Our goal is to further enhance Uniswap’s governance capabilities and create an even better experience for the community.

Tally’s importance has grown over time, as Uniswap Labs has stopped maintaining Sybil.org and removed voting from the app.uniswap.org interface. We believe it’s important for the decentralization of the DAO to have many great interfaces for governance. The best way to ensure that is to fund them.

We believe the DAO should have the flexibility to allocate resources to the governance platform that best serves the DAO’s needs. Many DAO contributors and delegates have expressed support for using multiple governance interfaces. The Uniswap Foundation engaged Agora for a similar-sized grant. Tally plays a critical role in Uniswap DAO governance—currently it is the only platform that allows for the creation of proposals in the Uniswap DAO (all other proposals are created via command line). Tally’s no-code proposal tools, including the ability to create private drafts of proposals to be shared and edited among delegates, are highly popular with Uniswap proposal creators.

Proposal Details

We are seeking this grant to:

  1. Ensure Tally can continue supporting the Uniswap DAO’s governance needs with the same level of commitment.
  2. Develop new features and improvements that will make participation in Uniswap DAO governance more accessible and effective.
  3. Build a stronger, more seamless user experience tailored to the growing needs of the Uniswap DAO community.

Our focus is on the future. With this grant, we plan to build out features that will create a deeper, more robust governance experience—one that scales with Uniswap’s growth and helps contributors make impactful decisions.

(1) The Uniswap DAO relies on Tally for governance.

Tally is the preferred governance platform for Uniswap DAO delegates and contributors, providing a simple and efficient way to vote, delegate, and participate in governance discussions. Uniswap DAO members consistently use Tally to engage in the decision-making process. As the DAO grows, Tally continues to play a critical role in facilitating transparent and effective governance.

Tally is the most popular onchain governance platform in the Uniswap DAO, and it’s becoming more popular over time.

image (66)
image (66)2160×2160 237 KB

Recent governance proposals and the percentage of votes that took place on Tally include:

Proposal Title Date Votes Cast on Tally Proposal created on Tally?
Onboarding Package Bundle April 21, 2024 52.9% no
Update Uni v3/v2 Deployment Process (March 2024) April 21, 2024 65.5% no
Mobilizing the Uniswap Treasury April 27, 2024 57.5% no
DeFi Education Fund May 20, 2024 41.7% yes
Uniswap Delegate Reward- 3 Months Cycle 1 May 25, 2024 35.9% yes
Uniswap Arbitrum LTIPP Matching June 23, 2024 50.5% yes
Onboarding Package for Gnosis Chain August 7, 2024 67.5% yes
Deploy Uniswap v3 on X Layer August 14, 2024 84.0% yes
Uniswap Delegate Reward Initiative - Cycle 2 August 26, 2024 78.0% yes
Proposal to activate 2, 3, 4 bps fee-tiers on Base September 4, 2024 29.3% yes
Uniswap Accountability S3 Renewal and Rebalance September 16, 2024 52.5% yes
Forse Analytics for Uniswap Revitalization and Growth Program September 24, 2024 69.8% yes

In total, Uniswap contributors use Tally for both proposal creation and proposal drafting:

  • 80 created proposals
  • 67 non-test drafts

(2) Tally has consistently rolled out key features and improvements that have enhanced the governance experience for Uniswap DAO. These include:

  • UNI Staking Support: Launched on August 16, 2024, allowing Uniswap DAO members to stake UNI directly on Tally.
  • Gasless Delegation: Since May 2023, Tally has relayed delegation transactions for the Uniswap DAO via its funded budget, making delegation free for Uniswap DAO members.
  • Import from Discourse & Snapshot: Seamless import of proposals from Discourse or Snapshot with just a link, ensuring a smooth proposal drafting experience.
  • Secure Voting Mechanisms: Providing a reliable voting platform that empowers token holders to make decisions securely and transparently.
  • Proposal Automation: Automating the execution of approved proposals to simplify governance.
  • Proposal Creation with Arbitrary Executables: Proposals can be created with customizable executable actions, including a custom “recipe” in Tally’s docs for chain deployment of Uniswap v3.
  • Collaborative Proposal Drafting: Enabling multiple contributors to draft proposals together for a more inclusive governance process.
  • No-Code Transfers: Making fund transfers within the DAO simple and accessible to non-technical users.
  • Notifications: Keeping Uniswap DAO members informed with real-time email notifications on proposal voting windows.
  • Gnosis Safe Integration: Allowing for efficient, secure management of DAO assets.
  • Wallet Support: Native support for a wide range of wallets so DAO participation is accessible to all Uniswap DAO members.
  • Public API: Enabling deeper integration with Uniswap’s ecosystem through Tally’s comprehensive public API.

(3) Tally has an exciting roadmap for Uniswap DAO coming up.

Tally needs you, the DAO participant, to help shape the future of Uniswap DAO’s governance tooling. We would like to offer a monthly office hours as an open feedback session for Uniswap DAO contributors to suggest new features and contribute to our roadmap. We receive a lot of inbound from Uniswap DAO contributors in informal settings and we would like to open this process up to the DAO in a more formal way.

Governance Improvements on Roadmap

Looking ahead, Tally has many new features on its roadmap that may further elevate the Uniswap DAO’s governance experience. Some features and products on our roadmap that may be interesting to the Uniswap DAO community include:

  • Staking: Tally has built tooling and interfaces to support Uniswap UniStaker. We plan to also build out infrastructure for supporting native staking on Unichain UVN nodes.
  • Gasless Voting: Similar to gasless delegation already in operation, Tally will stand up a relayer—to be funded by the Uniswap DAO— to relay voting transactions through Tally, making voting free for DAO members.
  • Forum Bot: Tally’s forum bot can post on the Uniswap DAO Discourse forum when voting starts and ends on the corresponding proposal.
  • Optimistic Governance: Tally is building a council-based Governor, which will allow a council to share control over a protocol and/or treasury. It’s based on the similar Governor contract, but proposals are passed by a council’s votes instead of by token voting.
  • UI Support for Uniswap Accountability Committee: Tally will provide a UI to display Uniswap Accountability Committee membership and transactions on DAO Home page.

Tally will provide a quarterly report for the Uniswap DAO, detailing key achievements, including uptime metrics, notes from Community Calls, support metrics, as well as enhancements to the Uniswap DAO’s governance on Tally (as outlined above).

Budget and Timeline

Budget:

  • $250,000 annually for 2 years
  • The Uniswap DAO will transfer $500,000 USD of UNI + a 50% buffer to the Uniswap Accountability Committee (UAC). The UAC will pay Tally quarterly at the start of each quarter $62,500 USD in UNI for the next 8 quarters.

Proposal Timeline:

  • Post RFC for community feedback
  • Incorporate feedback, hold Snapshot vote
  • Onchain proposal to approve and allocate funding to [RFC] Supporting Tally’s Continued Development and Enhancements for Uniswap DAO Governance

KPIs

Tally will provide a quarterly report for the Uniswap DAO, detailing key achievements, including uptime metrics, notes from Community Calls, support metrics, as well as enhancements to the Uniswap DAO’s governance on Tally (as outlined above).

  • Tally usage
    • We will continue to track the number of proposals and % of votes per proposal made on Tally and report on those to the DAO.
  • Roadmap feature usage
    • As we roll out new features for the Uniswap DAO, we will track usage of those features and report on them to the DAO.
  • Monthly office hours
    • An open feedback session for Uniswap DAO contributors to suggest new features and contribute to our roadmap
  • Uptime and Availability
    • System Uptime: 99% monthly uptime, ensuring the system is accessible with minimal disruptions.
    • Scheduled Downtime: Maximum of 2% monthly allowance for scheduled maintenance, communicated in advance.
  • Response and Resolution Time
    • Incident Response Time: Initial response within 4 hours for high-priority incidents (e.g., outages) during working hours in the United States, and 24 hours for incidents outside of working hours and low-priority issues.
    • Resolution Time: Resolution or workaround within 8 hours for high-priority incidents (e.g., outages) during working hours in the United States, and 24 hours for incidents outside of working hours.
  • Maintenance and Support
    • Bug Resolution: Resolution of non-critical bugs within 5 business days and critical bugs within 1 business day. For bugs that are not possible to resolve in this time frame, a post-mortem analysis to be shared with the DAO following resolution.
    • Regular Maintenance Updates: Regular monthly maintenance updates, including minor upgrades, patches, and performance improvements.
6 Likes
2

$250k / 10 proposals = $25k each (albeit less than full year).

  1. Should new governance/delegate functionalty be funded by the Uniswap Foundation? … It sounds like discourse will eventually be deprecated …
  2. Are delegates clamouring for such features/functionality on roadmap? (compared with free Google docs) If it is a maintenance/UI improvement then would tickets/vouchers for incremental tuning/training be better (to be directly given to delegates as part of skill upgrading)
  3. Contestability … If this is procurement for DAO services, then should it be an open call for all governance/voting platforms to make proposals?
2 Likes
3

Excited to see this; taking a step back, the increased prevalence and use of Tally is impressive but not at all surprising. It seems like the go to wording used whenever we or anyone we know proposes a vote on Uni.

Glassless voting would be nice, and we’re interested in more regarding optimistic governance and the role of a council. Since that isn’t something Uni has done yet, would be interested in seeing how this could play out, especially with some other DAOs seemingly implementing it pretty well.

With respect to sending funding to UAC, the quarterly payout makes sense; not sure if the 50% buffer is needed. The UAC conducts payments and budgets in $ terms and if the price of UNI falls such that the allocated budgets run out of funding, the team will request a buffer repayment, as most recently per vote 70.

Overall, we are definitely interested in Tally getting official “DAO support” and think they def deserve some sort of "grant’ for continued operations and increased features.

2 Likes
4

I strongly support funding Tally. It has been essential to the DAO.

However, a grant could also be a good opportunity to shape the work somewhat.

  • We don’t want to end up in a situation where Tally becomes the de facto only method for interacting with governance, and a DoS attack or geofencing of Tally’s servers makes the DAO inoperational. (Considering worst-case scenarios here)

    • Just realized that there’s Tally Zero, which is great! However I can’t get it work for Uniswap. Can some funds from the grant be allocated for maintaining and updating Tally Zero?

  • In my view, gasless voting through Tally’s relayer introduces a significant security risk. Relayers can censor or delay votes (including due to technical problems – faults, not frauds). While delegates can always resubmit their votes using on-chain transactions, this may require considerable diligence on the part of the voter, and if the DAO vote is contentious, it could lead to problematic situations.

It would be great if critical parts of Tally’s code, such as the relayer, are open source and sufficiently documented to be auditable and forkable by third parties, so that community or DAO-controlled backup interface and/or relayer can be run. As a minimum, the Tally relayer should be designed in a way that makes verifying their votes on a block explorer easy and part of the standard workflow for delegates. (Ultimately, as better solution in the long term could be to simply move the voting to an L2 with low gas fees.)

4 Likes
5

Tally is becoming the de facto platform for on chain governance. This is good, because we literally have people from tally actively contributing in uniswap, and in other daos.

On a very general level, i think there should be coordination and support between Uniswap and Tally: this should translate both in custom developments if needed specifically tailored for this ecosystem, and in a broader support.

I also support what posted by @kfx but in a broader spectrum.

This is related, and we discussed in other places about it, as Tally as critical infrastructure of the DAO.
There should be a general push for robustness: tally zero is good, but is not widely known and used. Making it easier to reach, making it as close as possible on the experience of the normal front end of tally, and even producing materials on how to use it is becoming more and more important; making actions and txs going through tally easy to read in an explorer for non savvy users, as well important.

3 Likes
6

We believe this proposal is overdue as Tally has been a important governance infrastructure Uniswap governance relies on and yet does not get as much support as it should. As a delegate myself, Tally has been easier to use as well as more responsive to feedback.

Tally in our perspective is a public good that directly benefits Uniswap and with this proposal, believe that there can be more collaboration and focus on supporting uniswap governance from Tally side.

3 Likes
7

All great questions @drllau_LexDAO. The Foundation does fund new governance work, but Tally largely serves the DAO and delegates themselves. Delegates frequently ask for new features, and we try to prioritize them as possible and as resources allow.

As a note: I think Uniswap should use the decentralized ddocs by the Fileverse and Filecoin teams. No need to sell our privacy to Alphabet.

For contestability, the DAO can simply stop paying for it. The Foundation has funded numerous other tools in the past and continues to do so. Tally is not the only DAO tool in Uniswap.

@Juanbug - Optimistic Governance is highly requested feature and we would be happy to talk more about it. Its very helpful in allowing governance to move at a higher rate and might be ideal for situations like new deployments on other chains where perhaps it’s not necessary to convene the full DAO each time.

@kfx - We’re totally aligned with you. Your worst case scenarios are very much top of mind for us. We prefer this proposal to look less like a grant and more like an on going relationship. Uniswap has provided grants previously for interfaces like Sybil but the grants structure is a poor design for ongoing relationships, and indeed Sybil itself no longer works.

We definitely think Tally Zero is ripe for funding as it’s an insurance policy against centralization and censorship, but as @_JoJo alludes, the scope for it is quite large and we would prefer to break that out as a separate project if the DAO is excited about it.

Additionally a way to think about this proposal is that by having an ongoing agreement, streaming the funds, having the funds held via the UAC, makes a strong system of accountability of Tally to the Uniswap DAO itself. We have concrete plans to open source much, if not all, of the Tally stack in the near future, so that should address other concerns, although frankly it would probably be more practical for folks to operate a Tally Zero than the complete Tally stack.

4 Likes
8

Tally is my go-to platform for voting in DAOs. I agree with the proposal’s premise and see the value that Tally provides. As you mentioned, Agora has received similar grant funding; however, to my knowledge, Agora has not raised equity capital. There’s a distinction between providing grants to teams in need of funding versus giving grants to well-funded companies.

Tally has raised at least $6 million from VCs and other DAOs, and I have no issue with fundraising. However, if Uniswap is contributing $500k in UNI over two years, it’s important to recognize that Tally would be benefiting significantly from the Uniswap brand, its user base, and the financial support aimed at helping Tally innovate its DAO-first features. This partnership should also reinforce the technical innovations that Tally offers, potentially setting standards for other DAOs on the platform. Given this context, the Uniswap DAO should hold equal standing with the other DAOs that have provided funding in future token or equity discussions.

While this may change the nature of the proposal from a “grant,” it seems inappropriate to favor equity holders, such as VCs and other DAOs, at the expense of the UNI community. I believe in value alignment, especially when the costs are borne by the UNI community.

I would support this proposal if it included language about fundraising, positioning the Uniswap DAO on similar footing with The LAO, FireEyes DAO, and MetaCartel Ventures.

1 Like
9

We do not doubt the value that Tally brings to Uniswap and to all governance where the tool is used, but we want to understand if these proposed improvements are essential and justify the 500k expense, and even if the proposed improvements are tailor-made for Uniswap or if they are for general purposes, in which case they should not be exclusively funded by Uniswap.

On this point, we would like to ask a specific question. Does the Foundation currently fund Tally? In what amount and for what period of time? @eek637, can you please give us some details on this? If the answer is yes, we understand that there could be double funding if it receives funds from the Foundation and from the DAO.

This is important to us. Could you please give us some more details on this?

10

The UF does not fund Tally. We’ve given a grant to Agora for their work on vote.uniswapfoundation.org.

I am supportive of this proposal for a lot of the reasons mentioned above, and because the Tally team has a long history of supporting Uniswap governance ops. I have personally likely consumed many of their engineering hours debugging a couple of complex proposals last winter.

I’d also just note that this is a nascent category, and teams are iterating quickly to figure out which features add value. Different teams will take different approaches to customer discovery and development. Having lots of talented builders in this space is good for decentralized governance generally and having them focus on Uniswap is good for us specifically.

One thing that’d be good to add is a process for accountability as it relates to the roadmap and milestones, and to come up with some KPIs that accompany whatever that process looks like. If Tally delivers the 5 things listed on the roadmap, what will that impact and how will we know? Could be just that quarterly report, but i think it’s important to tie the features to metrics (i don’t know what those metrics are, but sure the tally team’s thought about it).

6 Likes
11

hello @Userisky, Agora has raised Venture capital. I don’t know the exact amount but it’s substantial. I don’t want to comment on their business though.

However, if Uniswap is contributing $500k in UNI over two years, it’s important to recognize that Tally would be benefiting significantly from the Uniswap brand,

I would hope that the feeling is mutual! Our goal is to make DAO’s succeed, without whom, we don’t have a business. I think we’re pretty aligned in driving value both ways. Here we are requesting financial support for the service we’re providing: providing value to the Uniswap DAO. The way we’ve structured the proposal, we only get paid if we continue to provide value!

Given this context, the Uniswap DAO should hold equal standing with the other DAOs that have provided funding in future token or equity discussions.

We wouldn’t have it any other way. :heart_eyes: (Note: for legal reasons I can’t actually talk about things like future tokens in a public forum. Happy to chat privately…)

I would support this proposal if it included language about fundraising, positioning the Uniswap DAO on similar footing with The LAO, FireEyes DAO, and MetaCartel Ventures.

All three of these DAO’s have invested in Tally. We would be happy to discuss a Uniswap investment as well, but because you’re not allowed to “solicit in public” that would have to be a very different discussion, with different stakeholder, most likely with the UF.

We would still want to pursue this proposal however, as the goal of this proposal is not investment, but a business relationship for products and services. If Uniswap feels Tally is a strategic resource (which we certainly feel it is!) happy to discuss investment separately with the UF, who would be the only qualified org (I think) we could technically discuss with. BTW: I AM NOT A LAWYER and this should not be considered legal advice nor solicitation. (Just answering a question Gensler!)

Hello @SEEDGov Thanks for the questions!

but we want to understand if these proposed improvements are essential and justify the 500k expense

As a software business we’re continuously improving the product, testing the product, adding new features and security. It’s not really possible for us to ship the best tool in the space and not make improvements. We’ve shown that the community continues to value the new features we ship as we add them as the product is used more and more. The $500k is over 24 months, which is quite a long time. (Half the DAO’s lifespan thus far?) And the DAO maintains control over these funds with the ability to cancel them if at any point it feels Tally no longer contributes.

@kfx gassless voting security risks

This is an optional feature that was part of attempts to drive more participation among voters who otherwise won’t participate due to gas costs.

We built a decentralized version of this system three years ago: Gas Refunder specifically to address these concerns, but we didn’t find any market demand for it. It’s exciting to hear that this is a concern, and happy to address this as a separate scope if there is interest in it.

@eek637 Thank you for your support! We’re always happy to help in the proposal process.

Metrics + Accountability

We would be happy to provide metrics an accountability on a quarterly basis. As we mature as a business, we are also moving to move data driven decisions and we would be happy to share a version of that with the DAO. With think that data provides not only accountability but also helps inform our roadmap and the roadmap of the DAO’s we work with. Usage and feedback is probably the most salient metric that we could provide. Some of the larger products on our Tally roadmap (Staking and Optimistic Governance) will involve participation from the Uniswap Community to help sheppard success, and we would be happy to lead some of these work streams if it would help.

3 Likes
12

We would like to thank @dennisonb for posting this RFC. Tally has proven to be a critical infrastructure tool for Uniswap governance, and we are excited to see a formal business relationship take shape. Beyond Tally’s technical value, what truly stands out is the team’s customer support. Every time that we have reached out with a product question, the Tally team is quick to respond and address our needs, consistently providing white-glove support.

With that said, we would like to request some additional information. For a request of this size, we would like to see a cost breakdown —this would help delegates more effectively evaluate the proposal. Additionally, echoing Erin’s comment, we would like to see KPIs to measure success and hold the team accountable.

In closing, we’ve been considering governance improvements that Tally could help implement. One idea we’d love to see is UI/UX enhancements for delegate profile pages. For instance, integrating Discourse and Snapshot could allow anyone to easily view a delegate’s full voting rationale, helping to reduce information fragmentation.

2 Likes
13

I agree with the opinions of other delegates when it comes to acknowledging and thanking tally for their participation and contribution to the DAO. At the same time I do agree that this is a legitimate concern:

Perhaps the DAO/Foundation should consider funding alternative service providers along with tally to mitigate this risk.

I understand this rationale. Given your interest in having uniswap as an investor, I’d urge the UF to engage in this discussion sooner rather than later. If Uniswap does invest in Tally (by any means) will Tally still be requesting grants from the DAO in the future? My thinking here is that perhaps the DAO can simply send funds to the relevant legal entity who can engage in this activity on behalf of the DAO and tally can receive these funds just under a different ‘deal strcuture’

This would be relevant information to add to this proposal as well

14

We strongly support this proposal.

Tally is a valuable platform that is effectively enabling governance for Uniswap DAO and other leading DAOs.
Additionally, its team members are active participants in Uniswap DAO - this both contributes to the continuous improvement of Tally (with them experiencing using Tally for voting first hand) and to creating a healthy Uniswap DAO ecosystem.
Finally, we always had a positive experience with the team in our interactions with them. They are open to dialogue, and receptive to promptly solving issues.

15

Hey folks! Thank you everyone for your engagement. Give us a couple days, and we’ll get back to you early next week with new responses!

Thank you!

1 Like
16

GFX will vote in favor of Tally’s proposal because we believe Tally should be a core service provider to the DAO. They have been our go-to governance interface since 2021 and have always supported us and other delegates in making proposals and researching governance activity.

As far as we know, this is the first time Tally has made this sort of request to a DAO. Does Tally plan on making similar requests to other major DAOs on its interface?

17

Hello folks! Thanks for all the engagement- to answer a few more questions:

@GFXlabs - Yes we intend on making similar request to other major DAO’s for the use of the interface. We’re largely moving to find better alignment with our user base in a way that allows us to continue to reinvest and grow with the community.

@jengajojo - The Foundation currently funds Agora, see @eek637 comment above. Our request is about the same financially. Re: investment, we’ll followup with the UF to see what appetite there might be for that.

@404DAO - Thanks for the suggestion to integrate Discourse profiles and Snapshot. Thats something I’ve personally wanted for a while so we’ll put it on our list.

It’s a significant investment for Tally to maintain best in class support for the Uniswap DAO. Generally our revenue goes towards:

  • Software development of new features, R&D
  • Software development to address bugs and maintain uptime
  • Testing and Security, ensuring new features or refactors are backwards compatible and safe
  • Uniswap community engagement, including contributions to the Uniswap DAO, monthly feedback calls, and quarterly reports
  • Operational business expenses, including the boring (but important) things like taxes, legal, insurance, and employee healthcare.

I’ve updated the proposal at the top to include more detail around metrics and reporting! EDIT: I can’t find the edit functionality on my initial post, so I’ll share here:

KPIs

Tally will provide a quarterly report for the Uniswap DAO, detailing key achievements, including uptime metrics, notes from Community Calls, support metrics, as well as enhancements to the Uniswap DAO’s governance on Tally (as outlined above).

  • Tally usage

    • We will continue to track the number of proposals and % of votes per proposal made on Tally and report on those to the DAO.

  • Roadmap feature usage

    • As we roll out new features for the Uniswap DAO, we will track usage of those features and report on them to the DAO.

  • Monthly office hours

    • An open feedback session for Uniswap DAO contributors to suggest new features and contribute to our roadmap

  • Uptime and Availability

    • System Uptime: 99% monthly uptime, ensuring the system is accessible with minimal disruptions.
    • Scheduled Downtime: Maximum of 2% monthly allowance for scheduled maintenance, communicated in advance.

  • Response and Resolution Time

    • Incident Response Time: Initial response within 4 hours for high-priority incidents (e.g., outages) during working hours in the United States, and 24 hours for incidents outside of working hours and low-priority issues.
    • Resolution Time: Resolution or workaround within 8 hours for high-priority incidents (e.g., outages) during working hours in the United States, and 24 hours for incidents outside of working hours.

  • Maintenance and Support

    • Bug Resolution: Resolution of non-critical bugs within 5 business days and critical bugs within 1 business day. For bugs that are not possible to resolve in this time frame, a post-mortem analysis to be shared with the DAO following resolution.
    • Regular Maintenance Updates: Regular monthly maintenance updates, including minor upgrades, patches, and performance improvements.
2 Likes
18

As an avid user of Tally for some time now, we strongly support this proposal.

We are happy with the proposed roadmap and believe the pricing is fair. We specifically think having the ability for the DAO to actively shape the governance portal for Uniswap is great and something the DAO should certainly take advantage of over the next 2 years.

19

As the usage data show, and as the above comments have illustrated, Tally is the go-to voting platform for many—our team is no exception. We will therefore be supporting this proposal.

Before moving forward, there should be an explicit statement regarding whether or not the UAC pays out a distribution after a particular quarter. In other words, if this proposal is voted in, is the default option of the UAC to simply pay out quarterly distributions? In this case, if the platform is maintained well without hiccups, Tally gets paid. Or is the UAC meant to pay Tally based on quarterly metrics and deliverables? The latter option seems less reasonable from an upkeep perspective, but product-based accountability, like delivering on optimistic governance, would require the UAC to ensure timelines are met. It would be nice to outline this roadmap more explicitly, if possible. We understand that some feature requests will be introduced as a need arises.

We are also assuming that a part of the $62.5k essentially amortizes costs associated with higher R&D workload during certain quarters, while other quarters may primarily be composed of regular operations and upkeep. If this is the case, it would be nice for the DAO to have a guarantee that all costs associated with prospective developments will be included in this current cost structure. Some future feature requests may surpass the current budget or simply cost more than anticipated. In such an event, would Tally return to the DAO with a revised budget or a one-off grant? Ideally, if this proposal passes, the $500k across 2 years is fixed to prevent governance overhead.

20

Big fan of Tally and my go-to when voting for @Avantgarde. My experience with the Tally support has also only been very positive, so I thank the team for this proposal. Keen to support this as a next step to strengthen the relationship between Tally and Uniswap further. As @_JoJo mentions, would be interesting to explore more custom, Uni-specific developments in the future. Optimistic governance is something I personally find quite interesting as a concept.

Also appreciate the addition of KPIs and clearer reporting framework to the prop, but I do think @Userisky and @SEEDGov make important points on the funding and exclusivity, however, that I don’t think have been properly addressed yet.