The following reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Manugotsuka, and it’s based on their combined research, fact-checking, and ideation.
First of all, we appreciate the intent. Lowering the barrier to surface ideas and pooling community votes fits the spirit of open governance. A factory that helps smaller holders coordinate could be helpful if it is designed and operated with strong safeguards.
Our concern is that this tries to solve a social participation problem with a technical mechanism. Uniswap already has many delegates who can sponsor proposals, and reaching 10M votes inside a factory would still require support from large delegates in practice (that might help submitting proposals in the first place). That means the real work remains outreach, coalition building, and transparent deliberation. A factory alone will not fix low engagement.
The request to delegate 20MUNI to the factory is hard to accept without clearer ownership, rules, and accountability. The proposal leaves open who will deploy and steward the system, and it requests funding before demonstrating that the model increases high-quality participation.
For now, we plan to vote against. We like the direction, but we need neutral custody and governance of the factory, a clear operating policy for the delegated votes, and evidence that the model improves participation quality before committing treasury voting power and development funds. When those pieces are in place, we will be open to revisiting this idea.