mirror of
https://github.com/Instadapp/boardroom-inc-protocol-Info.git
synced 2024-07-29 22:37:02 +00:00
Create Update Week 22 2021 03-06-21.md
This commit is contained in:
AngelDeBenji
GitHub
parent
d050a043bc
commit
14579cc08c
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,150 @@
|
|||
# Governance Update
|
||||
|
||||
## Live Votes [On-Chain]
|
||||
|
||||
| Name | Category | Link |
|
||||
| ------------- |:-------------:| :-----:|
|
||||
| Proposal #4: Reduce the UNI proposal submission threshold to 2.5M | Governance Procedure | [Vote](https://app.boardroom.info/uniswap/proposal/4) |
|
||||
|
||||
Summary:\
|
||||
Following results of [Temperature-check](https://snapshot.org/#/uniswap/proposal/QmNPvJSYqtpN8JeReGACfPJNx7yXZrsrcAKDsjHvbx3Pu3) on this issue
|
||||
this proposal lowers the UNI proposal submission threshold from 10M UNI to 2.5M UNI.
|
||||
|
||||
Closes: June 8
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Live Votes [Off-Chain]
|
||||
|
||||
| Name | Category | Link |
|
||||
| ------------- |:-------------:| :-----:|
|
||||
| Consensus Check — Funding a Political Defense of DeFi | Treasury | [Vote](https://snapshot.org/#/uniswap/proposal/QmaUPBYqkiKnwkaVNVrUDpD6fk5EXXTqJjn71qHNYW4YQn) |
|
||||
|
||||
Summary:\
|
||||
Should governance allocate 1M UNI from the Community Treasury to fund a 501(c)(4) to defend the protocol and DeFi from legal and regulatory threats and help ensure the promise of DeFi?
|
||||
|
||||
Closes: June 5
|
||||
|
||||
| Name | Category | Link |
|
||||
| ------------- |:-------------:| :-----:|
|
||||
| Consensus Check - Donate $50M worth of UNI to Chris Blec to leave DeFi for good | Treasury | [Vote](https://snapshot.org/#/uniswap/proposal/QmTj8EWNTTinpDa9aXZdVkhzPBXD2monu6ZFV1dfoojR2f) |
|
||||
|
||||
Summary:\
|
||||
Chris Blec has stated that he will leave the DeFi community for $50M. Proposal to gauge support for funding this.
|
||||
|
||||
Closes: June 5
|
||||
|
||||
## Recent Votes (Off-chain)
|
||||
|
||||
| Name | Category | Link |
|
||||
| ------------- |:-------------:| :-----:|
|
||||
| Temperature Check - Managing Systemic Risk in Uniswap's Community Treasury using KPI Options | Treasury | [View](https://snapshot.org/#/uniswap/proposal/Qme9MASbuzrX2W6o7e4CCKqQiLGS5yuBLmX8wkeM5awcio) |
|
||||
|
||||
Summary:\
|
||||
Governance treasury will retain 43% of $UNI supply vested over 4 years, currently allocated 113 million in $UNI. Current value ~ ****$2.724 Billion USD. Max drawdown starting on May 3 2021, in 20 days $UNI lost 71% of it's value, a loss of ~ $3.616 Billion USD. Proposed strategy to manage this systemic risk and volatility for the long term success of the community treasury.
|
||||
|
||||
Outcome: Did not meet threshhold
|
||||
|
||||
Opened: June 1\
|
||||
Closed: June 3
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Name | Category | Link |
|
||||
| ------------- |:-------------:| :-----:|
|
||||
| Temperature Check - Should Uniswap lower the proposal submission threshold? | Governance Procedure | [View](https://snapshot.org/#/uniswap/proposal/QmNPvJSYqtpN8JeReGACfPJNx7yXZrsrcAKDsjHvbx3Pu3) |
|
||||
|
||||
Summary:\
|
||||
Uniswap governance currently has a proposal submission threshold of 10M votes. Should this threshold be lowered?
|
||||
|
||||
Outcome: Passed
|
||||
|
||||
Opened: May 28\
|
||||
Closed: May 31
|
||||
|
||||
| Name | Category | Link |
|
||||
| ------------- |:-------------:| :-----:|
|
||||
| Temperature Check - Funding a Political Defense of DeFi | Treasury/Strategy | [View](https://snapshot.org/#/uniswap/proposal/QmVXXEXJJKjFJtwXyy4Xx3gBckhz6TvorZoLgX3yiB7Hki) |
|
||||
|
||||
Summary:\
|
||||
Should UNI governance allocate 1-1.5M UNI to fund a policy operation to defend the protocol and DeFi from legal and regulatory threats?
|
||||
|
||||
Outcome: Passed
|
||||
|
||||
Opened: May 27\
|
||||
Closed: May 29
|
||||
|
||||
| Name | Category | Link |
|
||||
| ------------- |:-------------:| :-----:|
|
||||
| Temperature Check - Deploy Uniswap v3 on Arbitrum | Strategy/L2 | [View](https://snapshot.org/#/uniswap/proposal/Qmehop1NNWP9VEf7tGLEAYRphVsXtdxkL7oKEhaXL2Xao6) |
|
||||
|
||||
Summary:\
|
||||
Indicate your interest for Uniswap moving forward with a deployment of Uniswap v3 on Arbitrum, by (1) opening the Uniswap v3 license to include code deployed on Arbitrum, (2) allowing community developers to implement Uniswap v3 on Arbitrum.
|
||||
|
||||
Outcome: Passed
|
||||
|
||||
Opened: May 26\
|
||||
Closed: May 28
|
||||
|
||||
## Ongoing Discussions
|
||||
|
||||
| Name | Category | Link |
|
||||
| ------------- |:-------------:| :-----:|
|
||||
| Funding a Political Defense of DeFi | Treasury/Strategy | [Discuss](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/consensus-check-uni-should-fund-a-political-defense-organization-for-decentralized-finance/12700/17) |
|
||||
|
||||
Summary:\
|
||||
This post outlines a framework for funding regulatory and political defense of the decentralized finance ecosystem with a grant from the UNI Community Treasury
|
||||
|
||||
Update 1: Following a succesful Temperature Check, forum dicussion is presenting some [concerns](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/consensus-check-uni-should-fund-a-political-defense-organization-for-decentralized-finance/12700/17) with the specifics of this proposal:
|
||||
(1) 30M is a lot of money to begin with, and (2) Uniswap shouldn’t need to pay for this initiative on their own.
|
||||
|
||||
Opened: May 31\
|
||||
Closes: June 3
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Name | Category | Link |
|
||||
| ------------- |:-------------:| :-----:|
|
||||
| Deploy Uniswap v3 on Arbitrum | Strategy | [Discuss](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/deploy-uniswap-v3-to-arbitrum-mainnet/12451) |
|
||||
|
||||
Summary:\
|
||||
Arbitrum launches later this week on May 28th. This vote follows a discussion around deploying the Uniswap v3 code to Arbitrum network.
|
||||
|
||||
Update 1: Following a Succesful temperature Check, this proposal moves to the second stage of voting.
|
||||
|
||||
Opened: May 26\
|
||||
Closes: June 3
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Name | Category | Link |
|
||||
| ------------- |:-------------:| :-----:|
|
||||
| Should Uniswap lower the proposal submission threshold? | Governance Procedure | [Discuss](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/consensus-check-should-the-proposal-threshold-be-lowered/12698) |
|
||||
|
||||
Summary:\
|
||||
Uniswap governance currently has a proposal submission threshold of 10M votes. Should this threshold be lowered?
|
||||
|
||||
Update 1: Following a Succesful temperature Check, this proposal moves to the second stage of voting.
|
||||
|
||||
Opens: May 31\
|
||||
Closes: June 6
|
||||
|
||||
| Name | Category | Link |
|
||||
| ------------- |:-------------:| :-----:|
|
||||
| Deploy Uniswap V3 on Polygon/Matic | Strategy | [Discuss](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/deploy-uniswap-v3-on-polygon-matic/12165) |
|
||||
|
||||
Summary:\
|
||||
Discussion in support of deploying V3 on Polygon as well as Optimism
|
||||
|
||||
Update 1:\
|
||||
Aside from ample [support](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/deploy-uniswap-v3-on-polygon-matic/12165/7),
|
||||
there are [questions](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/deploy-uniswap-v3-on-polygon-matic/12165/7) regarding Polygon's security and if it represents a concern for the Uni team as to deploying on polygon.
|
||||
|
||||
Update 2:\
|
||||
Following ample support for deployment on Polygon, [questions](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/deploy-uniswap-v3-on-polygon-matic/12165/23) raised by argument that Polygon is ultimately more of a competitor to Ethereum than an ethereum friendly option.
|
||||
|
||||
Update 3:\
|
||||
With both support and pushback from the community, there are [calls](https://gov.uniswap.org/t/deploy-uniswap-v3-on-polygon-matic/12165/21) to move to off-chain polling.
|
||||
|
||||
Date Created: May 12th\
|
||||
Last Active: May 27th
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user