Hello, Honn from the Uniswap Foundation here. Today we are proposing the creation of a Delegate Code of Conduct as we look to further mature Uniswap governance and add additional structure to our community standards.
We are fielding feedback on this Code of Conduct over the next 10 days, until Sunday April 9th, and will incorporate strongly-held and useful feedback into the document from the community. If there is no strong dissent from the community, we plan to add in an option to represent a Delegate’s agreement to abide by the Code of Conduct in the new Agora Delegate tool, launching soon.
Hello, Honn from the Uniswap Foundation here. Today we are proposing the creation of a Delegate Code of Conduct as we look to further mature Uniswap governance and add additional structure to our community standards.
We are fielding feedback on this Code of Conduct over the next 10 days, until Sunday April 9th, and will incorporate strongly-held and useful feedback into the document from the community. If there is no strong dissent from the community, we plan to add in an option to represent a Delegate’s agreement to abide by the Code of Conduct in the new Agora Delegate tool, launching soon.
Hi Mark, yes, regardless of the delegation size, the intent would be for all delegates to act in the spirit of the Delegate Code of Conduct.
Great question, Matt. At the end of the day, the Uniswap DAO exists to govern the Uniswap Protocol, and as such should have its best interests at heart. For instance, a delegate might consider the impact of a proposal’s long-term growth and sustainability and prioritize those over short-term considerations. Of course, individual delegates may differ in their opinion on whether a proposal is in the best interest of the protocol. Those disagreements may be debated in the forum.
Thank you so much! Hope you have a great weekend
Great write-up Honn. Do I understand correctly that this is meant to foster overall honesty and professionalism when it comes to governance participation and discussing the Uniswap protocol? Or is this more for the largest delegates?
Hi Mark, yes, regardless of the delegation size, the intent would be for all delegates to act in the spirit of the Delegate Code of Conduct.
Great question, Matt. At the end of the day, the Uniswap DAO exists to govern the Uniswap Protocol, and as such should have its best interests at heart. For instance, a delegate might consider the impact of a proposal’s long-term growth and sustainability and prioritize those over short-term considerations. Of course, individual delegates may differ in their opinion on whether a proposal is in the best interest of the protocol. Those disagreements may be debated in the forum.
Thank you so much! Hope you have a great weekend
Great write-up Honn. Do I understand correctly that this is meant to foster overall honesty and professionalism when it comes to governance participation and discussing the Uniswap protocol? Or is this more for the largest delegates?
Kydo from Stanford Blockchain here.
This is a great proposal, @honn24x. I think this is a great first step to giving more structure to the governance forum.
Kydo from Stanford Blockchain here.
This is a great proposal, @honn24x. I think this is a great first step to giving more structure to the governance forum.
For example, turning on the fee switch could hurt the protocol but benefit the DAO.
I would not necessarily agree with this @MattOnChain . Without a sustainable model of value accrual, Uniswap Protocol will not be able to sustain itself. Therefore, the fee switch discussion is not a binary one where the protocol would be hurt and the DAO benefit and vice versa.
Love this! Something I have been thinking about recently: Should delegates represent the DAO or the protocol foremost and are there scenarios where these entities diverge?
For example, turning on the fee switch could hurt the protocol but benefit the DAO.
Kydo from Stanford Blockchain here.
This is a great proposal, @honn24x. I think this is a great first step to giving more structure to the governance forum.
Kydo from Stanford Blockchain here.
This is a great proposal, @honn24x. I think this is a great first step to giving more structure to the governance forum.
For example, turning on the fee switch could hurt the protocol but benefit the DAO.
I would not necessarily agree with this @MattOnChain . Without a sustainable model of value accrual, Uniswap Protocol will not be able to sustain itself. Therefore, the fee switch discussion is not a binary one where the protocol would be hurt and the DAO benefit and vice versa.
Love this! Something I have been thinking about recently: Should delegates represent the DAO or the protocol foremost and are there scenarios where these entities diverge?
For example, turning on the fee switch could hurt the protocol but benefit the DAO.
