Platform TL;DR: Evidence-based approach in making Uniswap governance decisions.

Next year: One key issue is the fee switch. I expect to see careful, but clear progress here. Ideally I'd like to see much more supporting evidence collected and presented before making any specific decisions. Following that, I'd expect to see an iterative process small-scale rollouts on L2 chains and specific, less popular pairs first, while keeping options open depending on the results.

I'd also like to see some experimentation in meta-governance, giving more power to smaller delegates (using e.g. gitcoin passports for sybil resistance). The goal is to increase decentralization, in this way becoming more resistant against regulatory actions and the capture of "special interests".

My reasons: Bring alternative viewpoints to Uniswap governance; I did not see any other delegates representing researchers.

Let me explain why research is important for other groups (builders, LPs, traders, tokenholders). For one, I'm keeping up to date with academic papers published in the field, and expect that to illuminate my take on governance decisions. This includes being aware of the open research questions about the Uniswap protocol. There remain many "easy to ask" questions that do not have a clear answer, e.g. on the profitability of LPs and their motivations behind LPing, which definitely should be clarified before making any final decisions on the fee switch. Moreover, answering them is required to build sustainable foundations for DeFi, with the assumption of rational actors. I see myself collaborating closely with the Uniswap Foundation on e.g. proposing specific grants.

Skills: Scientific research: I'm a professional researcher with a good track record in my area, which demonstrates the ability to understand and analyze complex questions using evidence-based approaches. Governance experience: I'm the chairman of the scientific council in my research institute. The council formally governs this organization with 100+ employees. Technical: I'm deeply familiar with the technical aspects of Uniswap.

Past contributions:

• I've written an explainer on Uniswap v3 math that is widely read in the dev community;
• consulted a number of companies and individuals building on top of Uniswap or using it as LPs;
• actively answer questions in Stack Overflow and the Uniswap discord;
• became a Uniswap Foundation grantee to write on LP strategies.

3 past proposals:

• v3deployments.uniswap.eth subdomain and text fields: support, seems like a no-brainer.
• Uniswap Deployments Accountability Committee: support the idea in general, but would need more time to vet the current selection of candidates.
• Uniswap v3 Gnosis chain: weak support, Gnosis is a solid chain. I'd also support launch on Polygon's zkEVM and zkSync Era due to their future potential, and the possibility to have a (comparatively) trustless bridges. I'd have voted "no" for the BNB chain deployment, due to decentralization and reputation concerns.

Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest: Don't have significant conflicts of interest. If they're going to arise, I'll consult with those delegating to me, and depending on the severity will abstain in specific votes, or stop being a delegate.