[RFC] Treasury Delegation Round 2

[Doo_StableLab]

@Gauntlet

Have we analyzed organic delegation data from active delegates in round 1 to fix these dynamics?

There’s genuine no significant increase in delegation for active delegates. And this is especially pressing as many delegates as well as other stakeholders have been in conversation to trying to encourage more holders to delegate. But both due to legal and logistics aspect, there’s no interest in delegating nor re delegating. This was why the program was created in the first place and as time goes, DAO governance, not just Uniswap, but across other DAOs is seeing even less delegation and re delegation.

@Gauntlet

An even better approach would be to explore the re-engagement of active UNI holders post-DUNA and Fee Switch, including the potential for UNI staking and governance alignment that motivates UNI holders to be more directly engaged in delegation and DAO governance.

This was actually one of reasons why we delayed posting RFC for round 2 as we believed that was also the intention but after talking with Stakeholders including Uniswap Foundation, it was to be separate and implement it earlier.

@Gauntlet

Therefore, it is a requirement that any delegated treasury UNI has a programmable and automated end-period for delegation.

This is actually one of reasons why stakeholders are interested in seeing the change in the program as the new version will have expiring delegation.

@jengajojo

Ranking creates a zero sum dynamic with winners and loosers which demotivates delegates who are highly motivated, skilled, and aligned with the DAO’s values.

At the end of the day, how do you define “delegates who are highly motivated, skilled, and aligned with the DAO’s values”? And if there’s a scoring to measure it then there’s ranking indeed.