I’m simple. I will vote for myself every single time. I’m greedy and I’m selfish. I want my, at the moment of writing, 115 UNI to become more valuable. In order to achieve that, I will avoid UNI leaking out for policies such as airdrops. And if there was something to gain from handing out treasure’s UNI, then it would have to be dependant on me getting something from it. I only vote for my own’s sake, and I always vote against losing value.
UNI is an ERC-20 token, which means that, to most effects and purposes, UNI is fungible. This also means that if I vote for value, your tokens also become more valuable. These are the same tokens you can use for voting. And so, incidentally, my greed will benefit you as well. You may be interested in delegating your UNI to me if you don’t like spending gas, if you’re lazy and prefer not to pay attention to governance or if you find this pitch entertaining. In particular, I would like to have your votes delegated to me if you want UNI to be worth a lot in the future.
Agenda:
UNI in treasure is not given away for free, no matter the pressure. We were lucky and others weren’t, but being lucky is not unfair. Charity can still be voluntary.
Uniswap as Ethereum #1 Decentralized Market. It’s simple, and that’s why it’s the best. It could potentially be the default way to swap tokens, and built into an standard.
UNI as stake and passive income. It is a governance token, so UNI holders put the conditions, and that makes it valuable and good to HODL. UNI will be valuable because it will govern and collect small fees over a market, which will be valuable due to holding the biggest amounts of liquidity possible.
Keep Uniswap simple. When ETH 2.0 launches, keep it as a shard, don’t move it to L2. It’s the biggest market, it deserves being in mainnet. Other L2 dapps will be the ones interacting with Uniswap, making it a convenient market node for all.
Just to make things clear, at the moment I am delegating my scarce votes to PenguinParty. If I get a decently sized amount of UNI, I will undelegate from them and vote independently. I can make a Discord so that we can discuss policies and strategies that can build value.
Please discuss and ask for specific views about specific topics so that you can see at a first glance if I’m the correct Delegate for you.
I agree with your pitch, and while I’m dedicated to being an active and productive member of the Uniswap community, I have too much on my plate right now to vote independently and would prefer to delegate my UNI. I have ~15,000 UNI available to delegate.
My thoughts so far:
Third-party proxy contract users are not Uniswap users. Everyone makes a conscious decision on the amount of time, gas, and energy they are willing to spend in DeFi. Choosing to participate by proxy is NOT a choice to participate in Uniswap.
As the community develops, value should be preserved above all else, especially in the short term (18-24 months out). UNI value is directly tied to the influence of Uniswap in the overall DeFi space; any additional contributions should be held off in favor of preserving value until ETH 2.0 has fully transitioned and Uniswap is a functioning shard of the system.
Agree Uniswap should stay on mainnet in 2.0.
Promoted Token Lists should reflect unique use cases and protocols. The more DeFi projects integrated into Uniswap, the better.
The workings of the governance system should be less forum-based and more interactive. Forums are a good means of discussion, but a slow means to implement change. I would not be opposed to spending some UNI on bounties to incentive turning some forum features into apps. Doesn’t have to be a proposal, but I’d like to see more community engagement in making the broader community aware of Uniswap. This includes help pages, a Wiki for starters and advanced users, etc.
I will have to do some more reading on potential proposals and get your feedback on specifics to make sure you’re a good fit.
Any delegate I choose must be humbly aware of the amount of assets currently locked in Uniswap and make votes that will preserve Uniswap dominance in the DeFi Space and preserve the value of all members.
My main concern is your stats: Joined 1 day ago, spend 5 hours of read time on 1.2k posts and 62 topics, which comes out to 4 posts/second read and less than 5 seconds spent on each topic. Those numbers aren’t outstanding.
I also disagree with your suggestion of having a separate discord to discuss policies, I will not delegate to closed door deals that aren’t publicly available on the governance forum.
Question: Let’s pretend you’re given unilateral control of the first three proposals to pass. That means you get to write them; they face no opposition, and they will 100% be implemented. What are your first three proposals?
Congrats, that’s a whole lot of tokens, thanks for the thoughtful post. Let me get this thing out of the way first:
My main concern is your stats: Joined 1 day ago, spend 5 hours of read time on 1.2k posts and 62 topics, which comes out to 4 posts/second read and less than 5 seconds spent on each topic. Those numbers aren’t outstanding.
5*3600 = 18ks; 18ks /1.2k posts = ~15s per post.
Even though I’m a fast reader I can’t take it at that pace. The main reason I was fairly fast while reading is that I skimmed through many low quality agree or disagree posts and took mindful reads on the points that interested me. So really I spent 80% of the time reading 20% of the most interesting stuff, and speedread the rest.
I also had already read some of the most relevant posts in forum before making the account, mostly the ones about fees. I wasn’t too aware of this whole Dharma thing, so I took a big part of my day to get updated on all this.
Let’s talk politics. This wasn’t what I wanted, I rather discuss the specifics of specifics, but I can get slightly creative. Let’s not assume I can propose and accept things like transferring 10% of all UNI to myself, because I probably would. Getting serious:
Failed proposals burn 1% UNI. Forcing people people to have to use gas to stop proposals should be punished. This deters spammers. I could consider up to a 5%. The bigger the burn, the bigger the return to the rest. This is pretty much a pay from failing proposers to the rest of UNI holders. 1% sounds like enough, though.
Incentivizing pools can be a problem. Dropping 5M per major LP sounds like way too much. Incentivize pools means taking relative UNI from current holders and give it to liquidity holders, which don’t have to be necessarily interested in UNI long term. It’s paying others to provide liquidity, a share of the fees earned we cannot even collect yet. Do we need that? That’s diluting our relative power. But yet, the treasure’s got to get out somehow, as Uniswap’s team already got their cut whether we choose to hand the treasure out or not, and that means they will be too powerful in the future. In that sense, the system is biased towards handing out the UNI. I’d risk it and incentivize pools, and, counter-intuitively, ETH-UNI between those. If ETH-UNI is incentivized, then UNI is staked and it becomes more scarce and valuable, and its price will rise as people will want to get it to stake and to vote. And, so, behold:
All four previous incentivized pools get 5M for yet another 60 days.
ETH-UNI gets 10M for 60 days. Why 10M? It’s a way to hand UNI out to UNI holders, instead of simply hiring external actors with the newly minted UNI so that they let us out liquidity and we can feel bigger.
0.05% fees decidable by treasure are sent to a contract with external functions that swap non-WETH non-UNI tokens to WETH, swap WETH to UNI. Functions can be called by anyone (who wants to spend the gas), and with using its funds to buy UNI, it could burn it or, in the future, redistribute that UNI to UNI holders? Burning makes UNI more valuable for the rest. Maybe a L2 solution is able to find a cheap way to redistribute that UNI to holders proportionally. Maybe just hand out the ether instead of UNI, the sky is the limit, really.
Why is fee not in the list: Someone else will trigger the fee anyway, so why waste a ruthless proposal on that.
Also, I proposed Discord to try to keep stuff organized and avoid brainstorming in the forums, we could use any publicly accessible platform, or simply use the forums. Discord derails stuff fast
Also I do like the proposal @Mr_Po made to increase a value that states how many blocks elapse from the moment a proposal is made to the moment the vote starts, so that people can change delegates accordingly, so I could swap the third proposal I made for that instead. I think getting ninja proposals and being unable to change votes is scummy and should be fixed ASAP.