Uniswap’s second governance vote fails2. November 2020
Uniswap had failed to validate a first proposal from the community a few weeks ago. And the decentralized exchange runs into difficulties again, since a second vote was rejected.
New vote and new failure for Uniswap
This second Bitcoin Circuit governance proposal was again published by Dharma. This involved distributing UNI tokens to Uniswap users, as had already been the case last September , when they were launched. The beneficiaries were then able to receive 400 UNI each. This new airdrop was intended for users who had interacted with Uniswap through a proxy contract, and who had therefore not been detected by the first airdrop. A total of 12,619 addresses would each have received 400 UNI .
But the distribution of UNI to the damaged addresses will not take place. The vote of governance uniswap failed again, for the same reasons as the first vote. The community was overwhelmingly in favor of the new airdrop, with 37,555,068 “For” votes and 1,280,632 “Against” votes. But the votes in favor did not reach the necessary threshold of 40,000 UNI tokens, so the ballot was canceled just like the first.
The governance of Uniswap in question
As a reminder, the first vote was precisely to lower the threshold to 30,000 UNI tokens to validate a decision. If this had been accepted, this second vote would also have been validated. All this therefore gives rise to new questions about the governance of Uniswap. How can a protocol make changes if it fails to make the number of tokens necessary to validate them?
For now, Uniswap does not seem threatened by this limitation: we learned last week that $ 3 billion in cryptocurrency was now locked in its services . But how long will it last?
If this blockage persists with the next governance votes, Uniswap will have to face an uncomfortable reality and consider solutions that will go through a means other than a democratic vote … And perhaps trigger the opprobrium of the crypto community, which had already noted that Uniswap was less decentralized than it appears . The situation is therefore particularly delicate.