Author: @jengajojo @DAOplomats.eth
This proposal seeks to gather consensus from the DAO to increase the current onchain proposal quorum threshold from 40M UNI
In our post on ‘Preparing the DAO for possible Governance attacks’ several delegates suggested exploring increasing the proposal threshold as a simple way to begin mitigating future attacks. In line with these suggestions, we want to gather consensus from the DAO on kickstarting the mitigation process by increasing the threshold from 40M to a higher figure. We have parallely kickstarted a discussion to increase the VP of active delegates participating in the Delegate Reward initiative.
Based on the screenshot shared by @0xkeyrock.eth we see that there is room to increase the onchain proposal quorum to 45-60M based on the current engagement levels
We would like to hear from delegates on which of these increases would be best given the current engagement levels as well as the ongoing incentivized governance initiative
This proposal would follow the normal governance timeline with the quorum being modified based on onchain vote
There is no cost associated with this proposal
Author: @jengajojo @DAOplomats.eth
This proposal seeks to gather consensus from the DAO to increase the current onchain proposal quorum threshold from 40M UNI
In our post on ‘Preparing the DAO for possible Governance attacks’ several delegates suggested exploring increasing the proposal threshold as a simple way to begin mitigating future attacks. In line with these suggestions, we want to gather consensus from the DAO on kickstarting the mitigation process by increasing the threshold from 40M to a higher figure. We have parallely kickstarted a discussion to increase the VP of active delegates participating in the Delegate Reward initiative.
Based on the screenshot shared by @0xkeyrock.eth we see that there is room to increase the onchain proposal quorum to 45-60M based on the current engagement levels
We would like to hear from delegates on which of these increases would be best given the current engagement levels as well as the ongoing incentivized governance initiative
This proposal would follow the normal governance timeline with the quorum being modified based on onchain vote
There is no cost associated with this proposal
Thanks Ben, agreed here. I'd also suggest that we should wait for the results of the security analysis i mentioned in a prior post to take any actions.
Thanks Ben, agreed here. I'd also suggest that we should wait for the results of the security analysis i mentioned in a prior post to take any actions.
The Uniswap Governor's quorum is hardcoded and can only be updated via an upgrade to the Governor. This is a sensitive process that must be done with great care.
The Uniswap Governor's quorum is hardcoded and can only be updated via an upgrade to the Governor. This is a sensitive process that must be done with great care.
This is not correct. Even the simplest possible Governor upgrade would require engineering effort that must be resourced from somewhere, and costs would be associated with this.
ScopeLift would actually be in favor of the DAO pursuing an upgrade to its governance contracts, but changing the quorum would be low on the list of reasons for such an effort.
The Uniswap Governor's quorum is hardcoded and can only be updated via an upgrade to the Governor. This is a sensitive process that must be done with great care.
The Uniswap Governor's quorum is hardcoded and can only be updated via an upgrade to the Governor. This is a sensitive process that must be done with great care.
This is not correct. Even the simplest possible Governor upgrade would require engineering effort that must be resourced from somewhere, and costs would be associated with this.
ScopeLift would actually be in favor of the DAO pursuing an upgrade to its governance contracts, but changing the quorum would be low on the list of reasons for such an effort.
Just to clarify, last time we barely went above 60 mil UNI was October of 2023 which was "Complete initial funding of the Uniswap Foundation"
Just to clarify, last time we barely went above 60 mil UNI was October of 2023 which was "Complete initial funding of the Uniswap Foundation"
We appreciate the rationale behind this proposal, but we believe increasing the quorum at this stage would be counterproductive.
The community is struggling to reach quorum at the current 40M threshold, with largely-supported proposals not passing because of that (e.g. Forse Analytics proposal). For this reason, we would suggest reconsidering a quorum increase in the future, when the quorum is being consistently reached by a margin.
We appreciate the rationale behind this proposal, but we believe increasing the quorum at this stage would be counterproductive.
The community is struggling to reach quorum at the current 40M threshold, with largely-supported proposals not passing because of that (e.g. Forse Analytics proposal). For this reason, we would suggest reconsidering a quorum increase in the future, when the quorum is being consistently reached by a margin.
