One of the main contributors of the UNISWAP DAO left for frustration on Monday, with regard to other stakeholders working too much power on the decentralized protocol.
PEPO, a pseudonym delegate that other tokens holders responsible for voting on their behalf, have participated in the governance of Uniswap since 2023. He was exercising 455,000 UNI tokens, which makes him one of the 20 best delegates.
The reason for departure? Other organizations involved in the functioning of the UNISWAP – mainly the non -profit UNISWAP Foundation – have dismissed the opinions of DAO members and have not been receptive to the comments, PEPO said in an X Post.
“The behavior of the Foundation seems to have prioritized the isolation on collaboration and, in so doing, may have actively harmed the United,” said Pepo.
Devin Walsh, Executive Director of the UNISWAP Foundation, did not provide direct comments to Coindesk when asked about the accusation. However, she provided refutation on social networks.
“The participation of the delegates is essential to the success of the Uniswap ecosystem,” she said on X. “The UNISWAP Foundation takes comments seriously.”
Uniswap is the largest decentralized exchange with around $ 4 billion in deposits, down 60% compared to its peak of almost $ 10 billion locked in total value in 2021-2022,, According to Defilma data.
Like many DEFI protocols, Uniswap is controlled and managed by a somewhat Byzantine structure.
The protocol was created by Uniswap Labs, a for -profit company which is also responsible for its continuous development. The UNISWAP Foundation, a non -profit organization, is responsible for supporting the UNISWAP and its community, while protocol changes and the allocation of resources are controlled by the UNISWAP DAO, a type of Crypto collective governed by holders of the UNE token.
In March, the DAO granted $ 165 million to the Foundation to stimulate the growth and development of Uniswap ecosystems. This gave the foundation the mandate to do certain things in pursuit of its objectives without directly consulting the DAO.
Some, like Pepo, think that the actions of the United Foundation put the interests of the DAO behind those of Self and the Laboratoires United.
This situation highlights the persistent struggle to balance the interests of DEFI protocol tokens with those of other stakeholders.
Not the first time
PEPO is not the only one to highlight a perceived lack of DAO control in Uniswap.
In October, Billy Gao, vice-president of the Stanford Blockchain Club, a UNISWAP delegate, said that the sudden decision of the Laboratories of the Uniswaps to launch his own blockchain “had raised serious questions about DAO governance”.
Gao argued that the UNISWAP DAO should have been informed of the blockchain in advance and authorized to weigh on the key decisions of its implementation. “It calls to question (again) decentralization [Uniswap’s] Governance is actually, “he said.
Uniswap Labs did not immediately respond to a comment request.
Others wondered how the UNISWAP Foundation uses the funds granted to it and complained that it is not sufficiently transparent on its expenses and its decision -making.
“Transparency and communication are values with which many delegates agree,” said Coindesk Doo Wan Nam, co-founder of the Dao governance solutions supplier, a Uniswap delegate, in Coindesk. “There have been improvements.”
On May 1, the UNISWAP Foundation responded to criticism by creating a foundations feedback group, intended to guarantee effective communication and to strengthen responsibility between the Foundation and the DAO.
In addition, as a non -profit company, the Foundation must legally publish its finances.
But the problem is that for some delegates, it is not enough.
“It is a loss for any DAO each time a delegate considers that the only way to make an impact is to resign,” said Coindesk at Coindesk Paperimperium.
Behind the scenes
Some governance participants have also complained that a lot of communication and decision -making of Dao Uniswap occur in private, instead of publicly on the UNISWAP governance forums.
This has led to complaints that major decisions are all agreed by large closed doors before going to a public vote.
It is necessary that the proposals receive a certain degree of feedback before being presented publicly, said Nam.
It is no different from traditional governance. “The members of the Congress do not just blindly write bills without speaking to relevant stakeholders or other members of the Congress,” said Nam.
But it is a double -edged sword. As the Daos mature, there is also a feeling that they become more on politics and appearances rather than pursuing what is best for the protocol.
Several Uniswap delegates refused to comment at Coindesk when questioned about the complaints highlighted by PEPO.
Read more: Uniswap succeeds in a financing plan of $ 165 million after the Dao vote
