Uniswap profit-sharing proposal delayed, Paradigm researcher: Pressure from a certain VC caused it

The previous UNI fee-sharing proposal on Uniswap has been delayed indefinitely. Since the 24th, UNI has dropped by 20%. Renowned Paradigm researcher criticized the delay, suggesting that it was due to the involvement of a certain VC to push forward other projects they have invested in.

Uniswap Changes Fee Mechanism, Benefits UNI Holders

Uniswap had initially announced on May 25th that it would launch on-chain voting on the 31st to upgrade the protocol, allowing the fee mechanism to reward token holders who stake or delegate UNI tokens.

UNI Surges to a Two-Year High! Profit Sharing Proposal on the Horizon? 44 Million Votes, 100% in Favor

However, on June 1st, the Uniswap Foundation stated that the proposal had been postponed due to concerns from stakeholders:

Last week, a stakeholder raised new issues related to this work, and we need to conduct a comprehensive review of the matter. Due to the immutability and sensitivity of our upgrade proposal, we have made the difficult decision to postpone the vote. This decision was unexpected, and we apologize for the delay. We will inform the community of any significant changes once we have a clearer timeline for the future.

The Foundation did not disclose a new voting schedule or provide details on the "new issues."

Paradigm Researcher Criticizes VCs for Interference

The delay of the governance proposal has not been well-received in the crypto community, leading to further speculation about potential manipulation of the governance process.

Dan Robinson, a partner at Paradigm and a renowned researcher, expressed disappointment:

It's disheartening to see a large venture capital firm trying to subvert the governance process of a token at the last minute and delay community proposals for the advancement of their preferred projects.

Many in the community directly speculated whether the VC in question is a16z. However, previous reports also mentioned that the profit-sharing proposal for UNI holders could impact liquidity providers (LPs) the most, as they are not keen on sharing profits with UNI holders who do not provide liquidity.

What are the internal and external challenges of the UNI profit-sharing proposal? Is the Uniswap proposal aiming to challenge SEC regulations?

As of now, Uniswap not only needs to further update the proposal content but also faces ongoing legal disputes with the SEC.

Uniswap Labs Responds to Wells Notice: SEC Arguments Weak and Will Ultimately Lose, Ready to Fight for DeFi