atiselsts.eth on Agora

Voting Power	Delegated on	From	Txn Hash
93.757 UNI	2024/02/29	0x1b...1d37	View
0.07 UNI	2023/07/01	0x2d...778f	View
160.22 UNI	2024/12/22	0x3f...c664	View
1 UNI	2023/10/10	0x5a...5b70	View
173.486 UNI	2024/01/06	0x5f...00d5	View
1 UNI	2023/10/06	0x75...4bba	View
1 UNI	2023/10/08	0x77...e4c0	View
103.149 UNI	2024/02/29	0x78...2a4c	View
1 UNI	2023/10/08	0x7a...6fd3	View
1 UNI	2023/10/06	0x9e...6674	View
1 UNI	2023/10/06	0xb1...69f2	View
1 UNI	2023/10/08	0xb1...f2e9	View
1 UNI	2023/10/06	0xb6...755e	View
2.001K UNI	2024/01/03	0xd5...1850	View
1 UNI	2023/10/06	0xd7...3fe7	View
1 UNI	2023/10/08	0xed...ab71	View
191.392 UNI	2024/10/16	0xfb...94d7	View

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

Voting history and up-to-date delegate platform: at Uniswap's governance forum.

Original delegate statement:

Next year: One key issue is the fee switch. I'd vote against turning on fee switch at this point (Q2 2023), as the stakes are high, and many unresolved issues remain. I expect to see careful, but clear progress here. Ideally I'd like to see more supporting evidence collected and presented before making any specific decisions. Following that, I'd expect to see an iterative process with initial deployments on L2 chains (lower-risk), and keeping the future 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: I'm interested in the Uniswap protocol, see the protocol and it's ecosystem as among the most important in crypto, and want to bring alternative viewpoints to Uniswap governance.

I believe that research perspective 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, in particular about the profitability of LPs and potential protocol improvements for their benefit. The LP perspective is critical and needs more thought before making any final decisions on the fee switch. Moreover, answering such questions 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:

written an explainer on Uniswap v3 math that is widely read in the dev community;
consulted a number of companies and individuals who build on top of Uniswap or provide liquidity;
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, no opinion on the specific 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, depending on the severity will abstain in specific votes, or stop being a delegate.

Past Votes

Protocol Fee Expansion: Vote 2

Protocol Fee Expansion: Vote 1

UNIfication

Strategic Renewal of Gnosis, Linea, and Mantle Deployments

Establish Uniswap Governance as "DUNI," a Wyoming DUNA

Scaling V4 and Supporting Unichain

Scaling V4 and Supporting Unichain

Approved Budgets Rebalancing (S4)

UAC Renewal S4

Establish Uniswap v4 Licensing Process

BoB Uniswap v3 Incentives Package

Uniswap Unleashed

Unichain and Uniswap v4 Liquidity Incentives

Uniswap Delegate Reward Initiative - Cycle 3

Governance Proposal - Adopt The SEAL Safe Harbor Agreement

Uniswap DAO Principles

Incentive Package for Sonic

Scale Uniswap Liquidity on Celo

Supporting Tally’s Development and Enhancements for Uniswap DAO Governance

Uniswap Growth Program Trial

Delegate Statement

Top Issues

Represented Stakeholders

Past Votes

Protocol Fee Expansion: Vote 2

Protocol Fee Expansion: Vote 1

UNIfication

Strategic Renewal of Gnosis, Linea, and Mantle Deployments

Establish Uniswap Governance as "DUNI," a Wyoming DUNA

Scaling V4 and Supporting Unichain

Scaling V4 and Supporting Unichain

Approved Budgets Rebalancing (S4)

UAC Renewal S4

Establish Uniswap v4 Licensing Process

BoB Uniswap v3 Incentives Package

Uniswap Unleashed

Unichain and Uniswap v4 Liquidity Incentives

Uniswap Delegate Reward Initiative - Cycle 3

Governance Proposal - Adopt The SEAL Safe Harbor Agreement

Uniswap DAO Principles

Incentive Package for Sonic

Scale Uniswap Liquidity on Celo

Supporting Tally’s Development and Enhancements for Uniswap DAO Governance

Uniswap Growth Program Trial