Scaling V4 and Supporting Unichain
Vote: For
Support: Changes in this version didn’t affect our decision, so we will continue our support and vote in favor of this proposal.
1 Like
Trial run a Technical Advisory Board (TAB)
Vote: Against
Summary: Although we previously supported Treasury Delegation Round 2 proposal, we voted against this proposal, as we don’t think the current structure is the most efficient. We also don’t think that the fact of absence preliminary elections to the board is justified, as well as the size of the delegation compared to the Treasury Delegation.
Uniswap Unichain - USDS and sUSDS Co-Incentives Growth Management Plan
Vote: For
Summary: We are supportive of this proposal, as we think it’s aligned with the goal of Unichain growth and will provide a sustainable expansion path. The budget and structure is also justified with KPI-based budget and DAO monthly oversight over incentive distribution.
[TEMP CHECK] - Etherlink Co-incentives Proposal
Vote: For
Summary: We voted in favor of this proposal as we think that strengthening the Uniswap’s presence on Etherlink is a logical step, given the steady growth of its TVL in the last 4 months. The proposed 2:1 ratio of incentives is also justified.
1 Like
Uniswap Delegate Reward Initiative - Cycle 4
Vote: For
Summary: We continue to support Delegate Reward Initiative and voted in favor Cycle 4.
We think that this proposal will be helpful to address the possible quorum problems, highlighted earlier.
We’re also excited about “skin in the game” addition and looking forward to see the results of this cycle and how this addition will affect it.
1 Like
Establish Uniswap Governance as “DUNI,” a Wyoming DUNA
Vote: For
Summary: We voted in favor of the proposal, as we see this as an important step in the evolution of Uniswap DAO with the engagement with the off-chain world. We’re also looking forward to the future capabilities of the established DUNI structure, such as the fee switch or legally binding execution of proposals.
Establih Uniswap Governance as “DUNI,” a Wyoming DUNA
Vote: For
Support: This proposal aligns with the Snapshot vote, which we recently voted in favor of, so we continue our support.
Unichain Co-Incentives Growth Management Plan
Vote: For
Summary: We proceed with our support of the growth management plan and have voted in favor of the on-chain proposal.
Launching Uniswap v3 on Ronin with co-incentives
Vote: For
Summary: We are supportive of this deployment, given the Ronin’s future transition into Ethereum L2, we think that it’s a good opportunity for Uniswap to capture and establish its position as the canonical DEX on Ronin. The structure of incentives plan as well as the match is justified.
GLI — Treasury delegation Round 2
Vote: For
Summary: We were supportive of previous iterations and this one is not an exception. We think that the current structure of the implementation is justified and should address the possible risk of not meeting the quorum, as well as other problems.
GLI — Incentivized Delegation Vaults
Vote: For
Summary: We voted in favor of this proposal, as we think it’s a good approach to address the problems mentioned above, and a valuable addition to the existing treasury delegation approach.
Treasury Delegation Round 2 Elections
Vote: 25% for cp0x, 25% for KPK, 25% for Event Horizon, 25% for Tane
Summary: We’ve voted for these candidates, as we recognize the unique value and experience they bring to the Uniswap DAO together with active voting, providing rationale for their votes and engaging in the proposals’ discussions.
We think that the delegation of voting power to the following delegates will increase the quality of discussions within proposals, as well as voting activity overall. We’re looking forward to the execution of this proposal and will be happy to see new delegates with significant voting power.
1 Like
Grow Uniswap on Plasma
Vote: For
Summary: We voted in favor of this proposal, as we think it’s a great opportunity for Uniswap expansion across chains.
Given that the deployment and incentives from Plasma are already live, we can already see that Uniswap has attracted TVL, volume since day one and also established as the main venue for WXPL-USDT0 trading activity. The incentive structure is justified.
Uniswap Community Proposal Factory
Vote: Against
Summary: We voted against this proposal, as we believe that it doesn’t solve the problem of voter apathy, but introduces additional overhead for verification and voting. It also allows for creation of ‘spammy’ proposals, given the low threshold in $UNI.
We think that workflow with proposal initiation on governance forum could be more favorable, given existing circumstances.
UNIfication
Vote: For
Summary: We voted in favor of the ‘fee switch’ proposal. The implementation structure behind the burning mechanism with addition of Unichain sequencer fees sounds reasonable, as well as organizational changes and establishing of the growth budget.
We’re looking forward to the on-chain proposal and implementation of the enlisted features.
Strategic Renewal of Gnosis, Linea, and Mantle Deployments
Vote: For
Summary: We voted in favor, as we think that continuation of outlined instances (Mantle, Gnosis, Linea) and rationale behind it makes sense, and despite some chains having volatile TVL, there’s still potential opportunity there. The previous and future exclusions (from the proposal) are also reasonable, given the current state of these chains. The duration of the renewal as well as requested budget is also justified.
1 Like
Strategic Renewal of Gnosis, Linea, and Mantle Deployments
Vote: For
Support: We voted in favor as it is an on-chain version of the Snapshot vote, we previously supported.
1 Like
UNIfication - onchain
Vote: For
Summary: We voted ‘For’, as it’s the next step in previously supported Snapshot vote.
[Temp Check] Protocol Fee Expansion: Eight More Chains and Remaining Mainnet V3 Pools
Vote: For
Summary: We voted in favor of the proposal, given the previous successful rollout of the fee changes on select Mainnet pools and burn system working as expected. The further expansion, including expansion on L2, makes sense for us as well as proposed implementation of enabling protocol fees for all v3 pools.
Protocol Fee Expansion: Vote 1&2
Vote: For
Summary: We voted ‘For’, as it’s the implementation of previously supported by us Snapshot vote.
[RFC] Governance Process Upgrade: Establishing a Statute of Limitations for Temperature Checks
Vote: For
Summary: We voted in favor of the following proposal. The introduction of 90 days limit for an on-chain vote after temp check is a sensible limitation, that should strengthen the proposal workflow.