Radical Decisions Needed – A little less than a month ago, Uniswap revealed its UNI governance token. Subsequently, its system of governance was widely criticized . This situation prompted Dharma to propose an evolution of the protocol, also criticized.
On September 17, Uniswap unveiled its UNI governance token with great fanfare, rewarding each of its users with 400 UNIs, or around $ 1,200 at the time.
In fact, it takes the equivalent of 10 million UNI to propose a modification of the protocol, or 1% of the total supply. Obviously, this amount has been questioned from all sides, because it is considered too large. At the time of launch, Bitcoin Circuit was the only entity with enough UNI to make a proposal, a situation which demonstrated the ludicrous nature of the matter.
To remedy this problem, Dharma Protocol made a proposal to reduce the amount of UNI needed for an attempted modification. In practice, Dharma wants to reduce the bar from 10 to 3 million UNI . In addition, the proposal seeks to reduce the amount needed for a modification to be accepted from UNI 40 million to UNI 30 million .
So far, the vote seems to be off pretty well for Dharma with over 30 million UNI “For” against only 630,000 “Against”.
A proposal that scares
Although the vote is mostly in favor of „For“, part of the community is trying to mobilize against this vote.
Indeed, many Internet users fear that the reduction to 3 million would lead to the creation of a „mafia“ which would take control of governance. Thus, if the proposal were to pass, Dharma and Gauntlet could team up and would be able to pass any proposal .
Some Internet users even go so far as to qualify the maneuver as an “attack on governance” .
Indeed, once the proposal is accepted, Dharma would be able to apply one of these demands, namely: use part of Uniswap’s cash to pay its users, who have been largely forgotten by the UNI airdop. As a reminder, users of protocols interconnected with Uniswap did not benefit from the airdrop, which caused their anger.
Other internet users, like Augustin Aguilar , founder of Pine.finance, fear a reduction in community power:
“If that quorum rate is lower, then it looks more like a cartel. Only 2 companies practically control the governance. „