If we took into account the abstention rate to validate the results of a presidential election, it would take time to elect one – or we would have to do without a president.
A second vote on Uniswap (UNI) ends with the rejection of a proposal which has nevertheless won the favor of the majority. Those who did not vote ultimately had the final say. Quorum, when you hold us!
Dharma retries his luck
This is the 2nd proposal submitted to a vote on Uniswap ; despite a majority of votes in favor, it was rejected for lack of a sufficient quorum.
The proposal aimed to distribute 400 tokens UNITED to 12,619 addresses that interact with Uniswap through applications outside the protocol.
Uniswap had carried out an airdrop of tokens UNITED September 17, 2020: 250,000 addresses each benefited from 400 free tokens valued at nearly $ 1,000.
The start-up Dharma, who was already involved in the first governance vote, is at the origin of this 2nd proposal.
If it had been approved, nearly $ 40 million inUNITED would have been distributed. The quorum threshold to validate the vote is 40 million tokens, approximately 2.5 million were missing to pass the proposal.
This vote comes just a few weeks after the first ballot which had a similar outcome.
We play it fair play
Each party defended its position by presenting its key arguments to the community.
On the one hand, those in favor of the proposal argued that this additional distribution was justified. On the other hand, opponents feared it would lower the price ofUNITED.
The co-founder of Dharma, Brendan Forster, thanked the community Uniswap for his participation.
He also claims that despite this disappointing conclusion, Dharma will remain engaged in governance for the benefit of all holders ofUNITED.
Cryptoassets are highly volatile unregulated investment products. No EU investor protection. Your capital is at risk.
It would take a vote to lower the quorum in order to unblock the current situation on Uniswap, but the results of such a vote could be rejected for not having quorum. The latter provides a certain stability to the platform, but it is also a risk factor for a hard fork if “too much governance kills governance”. At the second failure, the community remains UNI but, some leaders will end up getting bored and swapping the UNI with another token. We are waiting for the 3rd vote which could ultimately be yet another non-vote.
Litecoin, welcome in the Silver Age