DapDap proposes to leverage its composable front-end to build an alternative, intuitive Uniswap frontend and to collaborate with related DeFi projects to improve Uniswap’s market share. Our objective is to support emerging Ethereum Layer-2 networks and reinforce deployments where Uniswap is not the dominant player — specifically on Linea and Scroll — by deploying a user-friendly front-end and building strategic business relationships to drive liquidity and adoption.
DapDap serves as the ultimate gateway to Ethereum Layer-2 solutions, simplifying Web3 navigation for over 130,000 users since its launch in February, 2024. With a guiding mission to democratize DeFi access, the platform offers a one-stop portal to 200+ dApps across 17+ Ethereum Layer-2 networks.
With a proven success in onboarding a significant amount of volume and transactions, DapDap continues to collaborate with industry-leading Ethereum solutions on a regular basis, such as: Base, Blast, Linea, Manta, Scroll, and more. Recent campaigns saw DapDap onboard 16,000+ users to Linea, 22,000+ users to Scroll, and 14,000+ users to Blast, with total DeFi volume coming through DapDap surpassing $100M in transactions only 3 months after launch.
In the past, we’ve worked closely together with our partners at Linea (Consensys) to develop our first iteration of a fully open-source & decentralized Uniswap v3 front-end, as an initiative to support Uniswap adoption on Linea (link).
We’ve also recently received a grant from Base to build a custom Uniswap front-end for the Sepolia Testnet to facilitate product testing for builders worldwide. Link
In the process of developing the alternative Uniswap frontend on Linea, we realised that
Uniswap’s v3 contracts are live on 17 networks, as part of the Uniswap DAO’s initiative to expand its services to various EVM-compatible networks. However, besides oku, there is a lack of local Layer-2 market focus and initiatives that lead to user conversion and market penetration. Out of the 17 major EVM & Ethereum networks, the Uniswap contract accounts for less than 1% of the total total value locked (TVL) in 6 of them.
Possible factors hindering Uniswap’s local market penetration include:
DapDap’s main value lies in its frontend composability, giving access to Uniswap, LP vaults (e.g, Gamma), lending (e.g., Layerbank), and bridging (e.g., Across) within a single UI
Simple user journey centred around Uniswap as a DEX
Competitive UX compared to other local DEXs
Allocation of 5k $UNI for DapDap team efforts per network:
3k $UNI for initial development:
Block explorer support, i18n, Transaction data page, Embedded bridge aggregator functionality
1k $UNI for maintenance (server and dev costs) for one year
1k $UNI for continued integration of new DeFi services
Total cost per Network: 5k $UNI
Selected Initial Networks to Deploy: Linea, Scroll
Total Cost for 2 Networks: 10k $UNI
Allocation of 5k $UNI for Business Development & Marketing per network integration
Leverage DapDap’s Existing DeFi Partner Network:
Focused Marketing and Community Engagement:
Launch focused marketing campaigns using social media and influencers within the local DeFi markets.
Include Uniswap in DapDap’s ecosystem odyssey onboarding campaigns, simplifying the user experience and guiding new users through using Uniswap on these Layer 2 solutions.
Host community events such as AMAs, spaces, and workshops to engage user and gather feedback. Establish dedicated channels on platforms like Discord and Telegram to support and build the community.
Total cost per Network: 5k $UNI
Selected Initial Networks to Support: Linea, Scroll
Total Cost for 2 Networks: 10k $UNI
If the proposal is approved, DapDap will complete all integrations and relevant business development within 45 days and launch accordingly. After launch, DapDap will provide quarterly reports to the Uniswap DAO on user activity (#users, #transactions, #volume) on the integrated DapDap interface. If improvements are needed, we will communicate accordingly.
I’m sharing this as a discussion point. If you endorse this concept or a variation of it, please respond here or contact me directly. Depending on the level of support, I’ll look into developing this initiative further. This proposal represents the start of our enduring commitment to collaborating with and benefiting the Uniswap ecosystem as an alternative interface and valuable contributor. This strategic integration intends to facilitate wider adoption and boost participation in the Ethereum Layer-2 DeFi space.
Swap:

Pool:

Third Party Vaults:

Bridge

DapDap proposes to leverage its composable front-end to build an alternative, intuitive Uniswap frontend and to collaborate with related DeFi projects to improve Uniswap’s market share. Our objective is to support emerging Ethereum Layer-2 networks and reinforce deployments where Uniswap is not the dominant player — specifically on Linea and Scroll — by deploying a user-friendly front-end and building strategic business relationships to drive liquidity and adoption.
DapDap serves as the ultimate gateway to Ethereum Layer-2 solutions, simplifying Web3 navigation for over 130,000 users since its launch in February, 2024. With a guiding mission to democratize DeFi access, the platform offers a one-stop portal to 200+ dApps across 17+ Ethereum Layer-2 networks.
With a proven success in onboarding a significant amount of volume and transactions, DapDap continues to collaborate with industry-leading Ethereum solutions on a regular basis, such as: Base, Blast, Linea, Manta, Scroll, and more. Recent campaigns saw DapDap onboard 16,000+ users to Linea, 22,000+ users to Scroll, and 14,000+ users to Blast, with total DeFi volume coming through DapDap surpassing $100M in transactions only 3 months after launch.
In the past, we’ve worked closely together with our partners at Linea (Consensys) to develop our first iteration of a fully open-source & decentralized Uniswap v3 front-end, as an initiative to support Uniswap adoption on Linea (link).
We’ve also recently received a grant from Base to build a custom Uniswap front-end for the Sepolia Testnet to facilitate product testing for builders worldwide. Link
In the process of developing the alternative Uniswap frontend on Linea, we realised that
Uniswap’s v3 contracts are live on 17 networks, as part of the Uniswap DAO’s initiative to expand its services to various EVM-compatible networks. However, besides oku, there is a lack of local Layer-2 market focus and initiatives that lead to user conversion and market penetration. Out of the 17 major EVM & Ethereum networks, the Uniswap contract accounts for less than 1% of the total total value locked (TVL) in 6 of them.
Possible factors hindering Uniswap’s local market penetration include:
DapDap’s main value lies in its frontend composability, giving access to Uniswap, LP vaults (e.g, Gamma), lending (e.g., Layerbank), and bridging (e.g., Across) within a single UI
Simple user journey centred around Uniswap as a DEX
Competitive UX compared to other local DEXs
Allocation of 5k $UNI for DapDap team efforts per network:
3k $UNI for initial development:
Block explorer support, i18n, Transaction data page, Embedded bridge aggregator functionality
1k $UNI for maintenance (server and dev costs) for one year
1k $UNI for continued integration of new DeFi services
Total cost per Network: 5k $UNI
Selected Initial Networks to Deploy: Linea, Scroll
Total Cost for 2 Networks: 10k $UNI
Allocation of 5k $UNI for Business Development & Marketing per network integration
Leverage DapDap’s Existing DeFi Partner Network:
Focused Marketing and Community Engagement:
Launch focused marketing campaigns using social media and influencers within the local DeFi markets.
Include Uniswap in DapDap’s ecosystem odyssey onboarding campaigns, simplifying the user experience and guiding new users through using Uniswap on these Layer 2 solutions.
Host community events such as AMAs, spaces, and workshops to engage user and gather feedback. Establish dedicated channels on platforms like Discord and Telegram to support and build the community.
Total cost per Network: 5k $UNI
Selected Initial Networks to Support: Linea, Scroll
Total Cost for 2 Networks: 10k $UNI
If the proposal is approved, DapDap will complete all integrations and relevant business development within 45 days and launch accordingly. After launch, DapDap will provide quarterly reports to the Uniswap DAO on user activity (#users, #transactions, #volume) on the integrated DapDap interface. If improvements are needed, we will communicate accordingly.
I’m sharing this as a discussion point. If you endorse this concept or a variation of it, please respond here or contact me directly. Depending on the level of support, I’ll look into developing this initiative further. This proposal represents the start of our enduring commitment to collaborating with and benefiting the Uniswap ecosystem as an alternative interface and valuable contributor. This strategic integration intends to facilitate wider adoption and boost participation in the Ethereum Layer-2 DeFi space.
Swap:

Pool:

Third Party Vaults:

Bridge

Thank you, @Tane, for your constructive feedback and for acknowledging the positive aspects of our proposal. I’m glad you can see our genuine intent to contribute to the Uniswap ecosystem.
To address your concerns:
Thank you, @Tane, for your constructive feedback and for acknowledging the positive aspects of our proposal. I’m glad you can see our genuine intent to contribute to the Uniswap ecosystem.
To address your concerns:
Scaling down further is challenging for us. Our proposed total cost
5k UNI per network * 2 networks * $8(UNI token price) ~ $80k USD
which consists of our Dev cost, 1 year maintenance cost, business operation cost, and user growth marketing cost on Linea and Scroll is already lower than OKU’s deployment and maintenance costs for one Uniswap frontend, and it only covers our cost. Additionally, we commit to receiving all in UNI tokens and not selling for a year.
Our goal is not profit but to address a market problem we’ve identified during our GTM process where we see our product and service can contribute, hence sharing with the DAO a proposal to grow with the Uniswap ecosystem. Despite being new, DapDap has generated high six-figure revenue from customized front-end builds, attracted over 140k users to the main platform, and facilitated $250M+ in volume, mostly organically.
Based on our experience, we are confident that with our proposed amount, we can onboard a few thousand users or achieve at least a 20% improvement in Uniswap’s volume and user numbers on Linea and Scroll.
Thank you for considering our proposal. Please let us know if you have more questions!
Thank you for your support, @404DAO! I apologize for the delayed response; I have been on the ground at ETHcc meeting with people last week.
Please find the link to the Google Sheet that shows the swap data on DapDap since April 1st, 2024.
Let me know if you need any further assistance!
Hey @AbdullahUmar @jayyu23 Thank you for your response here. I highly appreciate the opportunity to further elaborate on our proposal and address the points raised.
Notably, our primary intention is to assist Uniswap by leveraging DapDap’s products, services, business network, and user base within the Ethereum L2 markets. We have noticed Uniswap’s lack of meaningful market presence in some Ethereum L2s in our work process, hence we started working on some Uniswap-related initiatives, reached out to some Uniswap delegates, and made this proposal. We hope to work together to achieve greater retail presence in emerging L2 networks.
Hey @AbdullahUmar @jayyu23 Thank you for your response here. I highly appreciate the opportunity to further elaborate on our proposal and address the points raised.
Notably, our primary intention is to assist Uniswap by leveraging DapDap’s products, services, business network, and user base within the Ethereum L2 markets. We have noticed Uniswap’s lack of meaningful market presence in some Ethereum L2s in our work process, hence we started working on some Uniswap-related initiatives, reached out to some Uniswap delegates, and made this proposal. We hope to work together to achieve greater retail presence in emerging L2 networks.
Concern re-OKU: We are aware of the successful initiatives undertaken by OKU, including their incentive programs. We view these efforts as an excellent foundation and believe that DapDap can collaborate positively with OKU and the current incentive proposal. By working together, we can direct more retail traffic towards Uniswap, thereby add good value to the incentive currently used. We have no intention to compete and think the market is too early for competition. However, through a more collaborative effort, we can help Uniswap grow faster together.
main retail traffic source:
Advantages of a Composable Front-End: I agree with you, simplicity is not enough. DapDap offers a customized, intuitive front-end that maintains key design elements of the canonical Uniswap front-end for familiarity. It also integrates other complementary local DeFi services, all centered around Uniswap.
One key advantage of DapDap’s composable front-end is its ability to redirect users from other local DeFi services to Uniswap contracts. This not only increases Uniswap’s visibility but also broadens its user base.
Network Selection:
We chose Linea and Scroll due to our strong relationships and ecosystem project connections in our past collboration. Our familiarity with these networks allows us to test our hypothesis that a composable DeFi service centered around Uniswap can drive greater attention and usage of Uniswap contracts. We are also open to considering other networks, such as Gnosis, and Base if more suitable.
Note on our Base Grant: We received a small grant from Base, requested by Jessy, to develop a front-end for testing Uniswap V3 contracts on the Sepolia testnet. This is intended for development purposes, not for retail use.
Integration Fee and a more official business relationship with the Uniswap community: The proposed integration fee covers the customized design and development of a product focused on Uniswap within a network. We tried to detail these in our scope of work and mockups. Our current work on the Uniswap front-end for Linea and Scroll mainnets and Base testnet are more of a public service with basic functions and limited customization.
Accountability for Stated Goals @jayyu23, those are great points! We are happy to collaborate with the DAO and OKU to develop an efficient accountability structure. Based on our experience, we are confident that with our proposed amount, we can onboard a few thousand users or achieve at least a 20% improvement in Uniswap’s volume and user numbers on Linea and Scroll. Ultimately, our goal should be to make Uniswap’s volume 10% of each network’s total chain volume as the first milestone.
Final Our proposal aims to establish a formal business relationship with the Uniswap DAO. The costs outlined are intended solely to cover our expenses, with no intention of making a profit (e.g., development, design, business development, dApp integrations, marketing, etc.). We accept a partial retroactive model and suggest the following ideas:
Some Stats on Dapdap in the last 24 hours:

Thank you, @Tane, for your constructive feedback and for acknowledging the positive aspects of our proposal. I’m glad you can see our genuine intent to contribute to the Uniswap ecosystem.
To address your concerns:
Thank you, @Tane, for your constructive feedback and for acknowledging the positive aspects of our proposal. I’m glad you can see our genuine intent to contribute to the Uniswap ecosystem.
To address your concerns:
Scaling down further is challenging for us. Our proposed total cost
5k UNI per network * 2 networks * $8(UNI token price) ~ $80k USD
which consists of our Dev cost, 1 year maintenance cost, business operation cost, and user growth marketing cost on Linea and Scroll is already lower than OKU’s deployment and maintenance costs for one Uniswap frontend, and it only covers our cost. Additionally, we commit to receiving all in UNI tokens and not selling for a year.
Our goal is not profit but to address a market problem we’ve identified during our GTM process where we see our product and service can contribute, hence sharing with the DAO a proposal to grow with the Uniswap ecosystem. Despite being new, DapDap has generated high six-figure revenue from customized front-end builds, attracted over 140k users to the main platform, and facilitated $250M+ in volume, mostly organically.
Based on our experience, we are confident that with our proposed amount, we can onboard a few thousand users or achieve at least a 20% improvement in Uniswap’s volume and user numbers on Linea and Scroll.
Thank you for considering our proposal. Please let us know if you have more questions!
Thank you for your support, @404DAO! I apologize for the delayed response; I have been on the ground at ETHcc meeting with people last week.
Please find the link to the Google Sheet that shows the swap data on DapDap since April 1st, 2024.
Let me know if you need any further assistance!
Hey @AbdullahUmar @jayyu23 Thank you for your response here. I highly appreciate the opportunity to further elaborate on our proposal and address the points raised.
Notably, our primary intention is to assist Uniswap by leveraging DapDap’s products, services, business network, and user base within the Ethereum L2 markets. We have noticed Uniswap’s lack of meaningful market presence in some Ethereum L2s in our work process, hence we started working on some Uniswap-related initiatives, reached out to some Uniswap delegates, and made this proposal. We hope to work together to achieve greater retail presence in emerging L2 networks.
Hey @AbdullahUmar @jayyu23 Thank you for your response here. I highly appreciate the opportunity to further elaborate on our proposal and address the points raised.
Notably, our primary intention is to assist Uniswap by leveraging DapDap’s products, services, business network, and user base within the Ethereum L2 markets. We have noticed Uniswap’s lack of meaningful market presence in some Ethereum L2s in our work process, hence we started working on some Uniswap-related initiatives, reached out to some Uniswap delegates, and made this proposal. We hope to work together to achieve greater retail presence in emerging L2 networks.
Concern re-OKU: We are aware of the successful initiatives undertaken by OKU, including their incentive programs. We view these efforts as an excellent foundation and believe that DapDap can collaborate positively with OKU and the current incentive proposal. By working together, we can direct more retail traffic towards Uniswap, thereby add good value to the incentive currently used. We have no intention to compete and think the market is too early for competition. However, through a more collaborative effort, we can help Uniswap grow faster together.
main retail traffic source:
Advantages of a Composable Front-End: I agree with you, simplicity is not enough. DapDap offers a customized, intuitive front-end that maintains key design elements of the canonical Uniswap front-end for familiarity. It also integrates other complementary local DeFi services, all centered around Uniswap.
One key advantage of DapDap’s composable front-end is its ability to redirect users from other local DeFi services to Uniswap contracts. This not only increases Uniswap’s visibility but also broadens its user base.
Network Selection:
We chose Linea and Scroll due to our strong relationships and ecosystem project connections in our past collboration. Our familiarity with these networks allows us to test our hypothesis that a composable DeFi service centered around Uniswap can drive greater attention and usage of Uniswap contracts. We are also open to considering other networks, such as Gnosis, and Base if more suitable.
Note on our Base Grant: We received a small grant from Base, requested by Jessy, to develop a front-end for testing Uniswap V3 contracts on the Sepolia testnet. This is intended for development purposes, not for retail use.
Integration Fee and a more official business relationship with the Uniswap community: The proposed integration fee covers the customized design and development of a product focused on Uniswap within a network. We tried to detail these in our scope of work and mockups. Our current work on the Uniswap front-end for Linea and Scroll mainnets and Base testnet are more of a public service with basic functions and limited customization.
Accountability for Stated Goals @jayyu23, those are great points! We are happy to collaborate with the DAO and OKU to develop an efficient accountability structure. Based on our experience, we are confident that with our proposed amount, we can onboard a few thousand users or achieve at least a 20% improvement in Uniswap’s volume and user numbers on Linea and Scroll. Ultimately, our goal should be to make Uniswap’s volume 10% of each network’s total chain volume as the first milestone.
Final Our proposal aims to establish a formal business relationship with the Uniswap DAO. The costs outlined are intended solely to cover our expenses, with no intention of making a profit (e.g., development, design, business development, dApp integrations, marketing, etc.). We accept a partial retroactive model and suggest the following ideas:
Some Stats on Dapdap in the last 24 hours:

Thank you @0xSocratic for your detailed proposal and additional explanations. We appreciate your efforts to contribute to Uniswap's growth in the L2 ecosystem.
We fundamentally agree with @AbdullahUmar 's opinion.
Positive aspects of this proposal:
Thank you @0xSocratic for your detailed proposal and additional explanations. We appreciate your efforts to contribute to Uniswap's growth in the L2 ecosystem.
We fundamentally agree with @AbdullahUmar 's opinion.
Positive aspects of this proposal:
Concerns and areas for further consideration:
We highly appreciate your willingness to consider alternative compensation models, such as accepting UNI tokens with a commitment not to sell for a year. This demonstrates a long-term commitment to the project.
Thank you @0xSocratic for bringing this proposal forward. Our team supports more front-end diversity as it will enhance accessibility, distribution, and decentralization, ultimately growing Uniswap’s user base. We are eager to continue working with DapDap on this proposal. As the DAO continues to do diligence on this proposal, we have some questions around DapDap’s current metrics.
Since DapDap recently launched in February, we would like to see additional user metrics from the last 3 months such as average trade size, swap volume per user, and transactions per user. Can you please provide this data to the DAO?
Thank you @0xSocratic for your detailed proposal and additional explanations. We appreciate your efforts to contribute to Uniswap's growth in the L2 ecosystem.
We fundamentally agree with @AbdullahUmar 's opinion.
Positive aspects of this proposal:
Thank you @0xSocratic for your detailed proposal and additional explanations. We appreciate your efforts to contribute to Uniswap's growth in the L2 ecosystem.
We fundamentally agree with @AbdullahUmar 's opinion.
Positive aspects of this proposal:
Concerns and areas for further consideration:
We highly appreciate your willingness to consider alternative compensation models, such as accepting UNI tokens with a commitment not to sell for a year. This demonstrates a long-term commitment to the project.
Thank you @0xSocratic for bringing this proposal forward. Our team supports more front-end diversity as it will enhance accessibility, distribution, and decentralization, ultimately growing Uniswap’s user base. We are eager to continue working with DapDap on this proposal. As the DAO continues to do diligence on this proposal, we have some questions around DapDap’s current metrics.
Since DapDap recently launched in February, we would like to see additional user metrics from the last 3 months such as average trade size, swap volume per user, and transactions per user. Can you please provide this data to the DAO?
Thanks @0xSocratic for putting up this proposal. I know the Accountability Committee and DapDap have gone over the proposal in the past few weeks--but I'll reiterate some of the comments for public discourse.
lack of an official Uniswap front-end support on many emerging Ethereum Layer-2 networks.
Thanks @0xSocratic for putting up this proposal. I know the Accountability Committee and DapDap have gone over the proposal in the past few weeks--but I'll reiterate some of the comments for public discourse.
lack of an official Uniswap front-end support on many emerging Ethereum Layer-2 networks.
Please note that each of the options with incentives will include a Oku and Merkl integration package (21.6k and 105k).
The proposal by default selected Oku as the front-end, which, if this proposal passes, will be subsidized by the DAO. Here, I can see a potential entry point for DapDap. The DAO could potentially decide which FE they want to select. Maybe Oku fits the more sophisticated market and DapDap a more familiar, user-friendly market.
Another option is having discussions with the proposing team (ie the target chain). In the event that the DAO does not want to subsidize the FE, which it often hasn't, then the target chain will be presented options for which FE they want to pay for. This can be Oku, DapDap, or some other team like Protofire.
native DEXs have an inherent advantage in building local engagement by incentivising liquidity for native tokens.
The question for delegates here is--does an aggregated, composable UI like that of DapDap make sense? Or does a more dedicated trading site like Oku make more sense? The downside to having too many FEs is that 1) it costs the DAO more money 2) it may actually confuse consumers more. Like people know what Oku is now, so they associate it with Uniswap. But every new FE that's added is less useful largely because the Uniswap brand cannot be licensed from Labs. DapDap abstracts much of this away. So going with DapDap is actually a bet on the DapDap brand.
absence of a simple and familiar Uniswap front-end across some Layer-2s, creates for significant barriers to onboarding retail users
I would argue that Oku's interface is tailored to both more tenured traders as well as those looking for a simple, familiar swap. Simplicity isn't the competitive advantage. The real advantage from DapDap is its own name. If composable environments win, DapDap wins.

I'm quite curious what other people's perspective is on a more composable FE that combines numerous dapps. I usually have a place for swapping, another for lending, etc. But I can see the utility of a combined interface.
Wouldn't it be wiser to have an integration for new deployment that's not yet live? The DAO expending capital on integrations already present on Oku may not be the wisest use of funds, especially with that chain already has less activity across all its dapps.
The Gnosis proposal above comes to mind as a starting point for DapDap. And a deployment that makes more sense is Base, but it seems you've just received a grant for that. Would be curious to see how much traffic is driven to that site over time.
Also, the https://www.dapdap.net/network/blast shows all these networks:
I'm able to click on each of them and select "swap". Once I'm routed to the swap page, who are you guys using on the backend? It seems like some deployments are already done?
Allocation of 5k $UNI for Business Development & Marketing per network integration
From the linked AMAs and odyssey campaigns, it looks like the current advertising is on a network basis--not specific marketing for particular dapps?
Here on the Scroll campaign, for example, I also see Uni v3 already present as a swapping option. So, I'm again confused about why we need to pay for this integration if it's already there. Plus, there are a handful of competing DEXs present on the page, which may dilute our reach. How exclusive and Uniswap-focused would this marketing be, and does DapDap have funding/agreements from other DEXs already?
One final question for @eek637--is the Uniswap branding on the mockups fine? @0xSocratic curious what the domain names you're choosing are as well for the swap sites.
Thanks @0xSocratic for putting up this proposal! To echo some sentiments that @AbdullahUmar has shared, as well as some of my thoughts on the subject:
Thanks @0xSocratic for putting up this proposal! To echo some sentiments that @AbdullahUmar has shared, as well as some of my thoughts on the subject:
The proposal by default selected Oku as the front-end, which, if this proposal passes, will be subsidized by the DAO. Here, I can see a potential entry point for DapDap. The DAO could potentially decide which FE they want to select. Maybe Oku fits the more sophisticated market and DapDap a more familiar, user-friendly market.
I agree with this sentiment that there should be some competition for Uniswap frontends, and it seems that DapDap may be suitable here. Although the DAO has previously selected Oku as a frontend provider for several different proposals, I don't think that this should necessarily preclude other frontend providers such as DapDap - particularly for different market segments.
On the other hand, one of my concerns with frontends is that having a proliferation of frontends can over-clutter the user experience.
I think I would want more clarity on the specifics of these goals. Specifically, how can we enforce accountability for these stated goals. For example:
Having this information would allow us to better gauge what levels of DAO spending would be justified.
Limited Reach - lack of an official Uniswap front-end support on many emerging Ethereum Layer-2 networks.
I see that one of the asks of this proposal is to essentially become a "DAO-endorsed" frontend. I don't believe that we as a DAO should officially sanction frontends without any proven traction. One way to address this is to have part of the funds + official endorsements should only be given once DapDap itself proves that the product itself can gain market traction, and let market forces decide which are the frontends that end-users actually want. A retroactive (or partially retraoctive) funding model would make sense here.
Thanks @0xSocratic for putting up this proposal. I know the Accountability Committee and DapDap have gone over the proposal in the past few weeks--but I'll reiterate some of the comments for public discourse.
lack of an official Uniswap front-end support on many emerging Ethereum Layer-2 networks.
Thanks @0xSocratic for putting up this proposal. I know the Accountability Committee and DapDap have gone over the proposal in the past few weeks--but I'll reiterate some of the comments for public discourse.
lack of an official Uniswap front-end support on many emerging Ethereum Layer-2 networks.
Please note that each of the options with incentives will include a Oku and Merkl integration package (21.6k and 105k).
The proposal by default selected Oku as the front-end, which, if this proposal passes, will be subsidized by the DAO. Here, I can see a potential entry point for DapDap. The DAO could potentially decide which FE they want to select. Maybe Oku fits the more sophisticated market and DapDap a more familiar, user-friendly market.
Another option is having discussions with the proposing team (ie the target chain). In the event that the DAO does not want to subsidize the FE, which it often hasn't, then the target chain will be presented options for which FE they want to pay for. This can be Oku, DapDap, or some other team like Protofire.
native DEXs have an inherent advantage in building local engagement by incentivising liquidity for native tokens.
The question for delegates here is--does an aggregated, composable UI like that of DapDap make sense? Or does a more dedicated trading site like Oku make more sense? The downside to having too many FEs is that 1) it costs the DAO more money 2) it may actually confuse consumers more. Like people know what Oku is now, so they associate it with Uniswap. But every new FE that's added is less useful largely because the Uniswap brand cannot be licensed from Labs. DapDap abstracts much of this away. So going with DapDap is actually a bet on the DapDap brand.
absence of a simple and familiar Uniswap front-end across some Layer-2s, creates for significant barriers to onboarding retail users
I would argue that Oku's interface is tailored to both more tenured traders as well as those looking for a simple, familiar swap. Simplicity isn't the competitive advantage. The real advantage from DapDap is its own name. If composable environments win, DapDap wins.

I'm quite curious what other people's perspective is on a more composable FE that combines numerous dapps. I usually have a place for swapping, another for lending, etc. But I can see the utility of a combined interface.
Wouldn't it be wiser to have an integration for new deployment that's not yet live? The DAO expending capital on integrations already present on Oku may not be the wisest use of funds, especially with that chain already has less activity across all its dapps.
The Gnosis proposal above comes to mind as a starting point for DapDap. And a deployment that makes more sense is Base, but it seems you've just received a grant for that. Would be curious to see how much traffic is driven to that site over time.
Also, the https://www.dapdap.net/network/blast shows all these networks:
I'm able to click on each of them and select "swap". Once I'm routed to the swap page, who are you guys using on the backend? It seems like some deployments are already done?
Allocation of 5k $UNI for Business Development & Marketing per network integration
From the linked AMAs and odyssey campaigns, it looks like the current advertising is on a network basis--not specific marketing for particular dapps?
Here on the Scroll campaign, for example, I also see Uni v3 already present as a swapping option. So, I'm again confused about why we need to pay for this integration if it's already there. Plus, there are a handful of competing DEXs present on the page, which may dilute our reach. How exclusive and Uniswap-focused would this marketing be, and does DapDap have funding/agreements from other DEXs already?
One final question for @eek637--is the Uniswap branding on the mockups fine? @0xSocratic curious what the domain names you're choosing are as well for the swap sites.
Thanks @0xSocratic for putting up this proposal! To echo some sentiments that @AbdullahUmar has shared, as well as some of my thoughts on the subject:
Thanks @0xSocratic for putting up this proposal! To echo some sentiments that @AbdullahUmar has shared, as well as some of my thoughts on the subject:
The proposal by default selected Oku as the front-end, which, if this proposal passes, will be subsidized by the DAO. Here, I can see a potential entry point for DapDap. The DAO could potentially decide which FE they want to select. Maybe Oku fits the more sophisticated market and DapDap a more familiar, user-friendly market.
I agree with this sentiment that there should be some competition for Uniswap frontends, and it seems that DapDap may be suitable here. Although the DAO has previously selected Oku as a frontend provider for several different proposals, I don't think that this should necessarily preclude other frontend providers such as DapDap - particularly for different market segments.
On the other hand, one of my concerns with frontends is that having a proliferation of frontends can over-clutter the user experience.
I think I would want more clarity on the specifics of these goals. Specifically, how can we enforce accountability for these stated goals. For example:
Having this information would allow us to better gauge what levels of DAO spending would be justified.
Limited Reach - lack of an official Uniswap front-end support on many emerging Ethereum Layer-2 networks.
I see that one of the asks of this proposal is to essentially become a "DAO-endorsed" frontend. I don't believe that we as a DAO should officially sanction frontends without any proven traction. One way to address this is to have part of the funds + official endorsements should only be given once DapDap itself proves that the product itself can gain market traction, and let market forces decide which are the frontends that end-users actually want. A retroactive (or partially retraoctive) funding model would make sense here.