David Alexander II
@megafund
Just as predicted, VC & special interest groups undermining the community. This proposal was centered on the deployment of Uniswap on BNB, not a behind the scenes lobbying battle about which bridge to use. Pretty egregious behavior. Take note https://www.tally.xyz/gov/uniswap/proposal/31 https://i.imgur.com/TzgOcfI.png
5 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
ted (not lasso)
@ted
1. “Don’t hate the player, hate the game”. Uniswap designed their governance for this to happen. 2. If we go by # of votes like, it’s 113 addresses for vs. 111 addresses against. Remove voters > 1M and it’s 111 v 110… 3. Why is a16z against it?
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
David Alexander II
@megafund
The original proposal was never about the bridge - it was about deploying Uniswap on BNB. While the underlying bridge should be sound, my sense is this never even would have been a debate if the “correct” bridge was selected, rather than the community’s pick
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
