(The picture comes from the Internet)
Overnight on the 13th, there was a sentence on Twitter without an avatar, no background picture, and a brief introduction: “We do policy and advocacy work to help DeFi flourish. (We do policy and advocacy work to help DeFi flourish.) “Defi Education Fund (@fund_defi) suddenly announced that it has sold 500,000 UNIs (about 10.2 million dollars), and will continue to sell 500,000 UNIs today. A total of 1 million UNIs will be sold. 20 million dollars. The original tweet is as follows:
With the help of @GenesisTrading, we sold 500k UNI for ~$10.2M USDC in order to fund the efforts of the Defi Education Fund.In the next 24 hours, we will be sending 500k UNI to Genesis and receiving ~ $10.2M USDC in return.
With the help of @GenesisTrading, we sold 500,000 UNIs for approximately US$10.2 million USDC to fund the work of the Defi Education Fund. In the next 24 hours, we will send 500k UNI to Genesis and receive approximately 10.2 million USD in return.
Many netizens in the Uniswap community and UNI investors saw this news with dumbfounded expressions: WTF? What is this stuff? Shipped at this time? It takes 20 million dollars to do an education job? This money is almost enough to build a school, right? How did its 1 million UNIs unknowingly “cheat” out of the community treasury?
This DeFi Education Fund is actually a fund to fund political lobbying activities, a non-profit organization that meets the requirements of 501(c)(4) in the United States, rather than a training organization that popularizes DeFi knowledge for elementary and college students. At the time of the original proposal, its name was called DeFi Policy Defense Fund. Later, it may be that the name was too revealing, so it was changed to the Education Fund. In its proposal, the legal leaders of various DeFi projects should be convened to establish a political grants committee to provide funding for existing and new political groups involved in cryptocurrency policy/lobby. Its goals include :
1) Educate policy makers to prevent regulatory, legal, political and tax threats to decentralized finance in advance; 2) Realize regulatory clarity on decentralized finance and related activities; 3) Promote support for decentralized finance and The law of decentralized governance; 4) Incentivize other DeFi protocol governance communities to contribute to this work (through the organization or their own organization).
Intended members of the committee include:
Larry Sukernik, Co-founder of Reverie. Rebecca Rettig, General Counsel of Aave Company. Jake Chervinsky, General Counsel of Compound Labs, Strategic Counsel of Variant Fund. Marc Boiron, General Counsel of dYdX. Katie Biber, Brex Chief Legal Officer, Member of the Anchorage Board of Directors. Sheila Warren, World Economic Forum (WEF) Executive Committee (Head of Cryptocurrency). Marvin Ammori, Chief Legal Officer of Uniswap Labs.
Grass snake gray line, prostrate thousands of miles. Seeing this, I would like to invite you to recall, is this person Marvin Ammori familiar? Yes, at the end of the article “What did the first Uniswap community call talk about” on the Liu Jiaolian public account on November 14, 2020, this person appeared on stage. He was introduced like this at the time: It is said that Marvin Ammori, the general counsel of Protocol Labs, has joined Uniswap as the chief legal officer. Marvin Ammori is the top lawyer in this field. He has provided legal advice to President Obama on net neutrality and served as legal counsel to the TV show “Silicon Valley”.
The proposal was put forward by an account called HarvardLawBFI on the Uniswap Governance Forum on May 28, and the poll began. A poll was conducted from 5/28 to 5/30. Afterwards, discussions on consensus verification were conducted on June 1. 6/1-6/6 voted for consensus verification. On June 12, the formal proposal No. 005 was formed. On June 30, it was passed with 79,681,052 votes in favor and 15,040,585 votes against it. 1 million fund proposal into a 4/7 UNI signed a multi-purse address 0x1C95930Dfc1139381265ce45B5f480F1EFae09A1, signed a multi-controller to the address:. Jake Chervinsky, Larry Sukernik, Rebecca Rettig, Marc Boiron, Marvin Ammori, Katie Biber, Sheila Warren
past For two months, the Chinese currency people complained about themselves during the plunge, while the American players were actively engaged in things and sports, and they were very enthusiastic. I have to say that this is the gap. Why did the faculty say when they met Edgar Snow in 1970 that he placed his hopes on the people of the two countries, but placed great hopes on the American people? The democratic spirit of the American people to actively participate in politics and to actively fight for democratic rights is indeed a few blocks away from us.
However, many American coiners are also dumbfounded. Someone deeply digs into this proposal, and there is actually a Uniswap investor (VC) behind it, which may be the shadow of a16z. Because VCs have a large amount of currency rights and voting rights, they can easily authorize agents to pass the proposals they wish to pass through established democratic procedures. The seemingly dripping DAO democratic autonomy is actually, in the final analysis, elite politics.
Someone chanted: DAO is dead, democracy is dead!
The founder of YFI Andre Cronje (AC) lost no time in launching a poll on Twitter. 70% of voters said they had never heard of this DeFi education fund before. However, AC is the opposition party of Hayden Adams, and it is normal to seize the loopholes of the opponent to conduct moral attacks.
The ins and outs of the matter are roughly as above. What is the lesson? I think the first point is that what we think of as the DAO, the direct autonomy of currency idealism, will eventually return to elite governance. Can the currency people, especially the community that can only speculate on the currency, promote any active proposals? impossible. The only proposal they hope to pass is to send the coins to them (such as lock-up mining), or burn them (to promote the price of coins). The worst and best proposal is not to pass. The coins are always locked in the vault and don’t flow to the second place. Level market, so that you can hold the price.
A talented netizen replied, saying, well, everyone is educated. This complaint exactly echoes the “education” in the name of the fund. Everyone was educated and took a lively political science education class. The DAO, whether it has the guise of democracy, or can it really play the role of democracy, will surely arouse more reflection. It is conceivable that the Americans play direct democracy like this, and the Chinese people have done the “XX DAO” project, which is basically a lie.
The second lesson is, why is Bitcoin’s decentralization so precious? Because of its game structure, the core development team cannot vote through tokens, push their own proposals and force them to pass. The core development team cannot force the miners to yield to their will, but can only achieve their goals through persuasion, lobbying and even tricks. Miners have a lot of computing power, but they are in a competitive relationship with each other. They cannot control the network together, nor can they control public opinion, nor can they force developers to submit to their will and rewrite the code they wish to rewrite. Bitcoin’s balance of power game structure and its powerful mechanism for maintaining the republic have been thoroughly experienced in the protracted expansion war in 2015-2018.
In contrast, Ethereum has Vitalik Buterin, which can command the world, and the Ethereum Foundation has ICO coins that can be sold at a high price (at the high of 60,000 in this bull market, the Ethereum Foundation sold under the persuasion of Vitalik. Some ETH); Uniswap has a team and a VC, and 40% of the currency and voting rights are allocated “for free”. The democratic process of DAO governance is their tool.
The world’s first public chain, Ethereum, and DeFi leader Uniswap are still so decentralized. Can you expect other altcoins and other projects to do better? The distance from Ethereum and Uniswap is from the earth to the moon, and the distance from Bitcoin is from the earth to the sun.
However, the consolation is that if the dominant player behind this matter is Uniswap’s VC, then its original intention should not be bad. Of course, besides being forced to believe in the original intentions of others, do you have any other options? not at all. You can only believe that they will not spend this money indiscriminately, but will use good steel on the blade to overcome obstacles in the development of DeFi.
As for taking Uniswap to contribute to the entire DeFi, it’s okay. Because Uniswap is relatively infrastructure, Uniswap can be better when the entire track is good. Even opposition parties such as YFI and Sushi will benefit from this. The broad mind is shown here. (Do you want to do it manually?)
One specific operational problem that makes people feel uncomfortable is that the proposal faked a multi-signature wallet, and said that the community should finally have the final say on the budget; also that most of the work of the committee members is voluntary labor, every year The committee’s expenditure is controlled within $150,000, which is mainly used to hire full-time staff to work, so and so on. As a result, the coins were sold shortly after they arrived.
It can only be said that selling at this low price is better than selling at a high price, and the overdraft of funds in the secondary market is smaller. In addition, selling coins will also help decentralize voting rights. Otherwise, voting rights will be greater and it will be easier to pass proposals that fit your own position.
Finally, there are still people who complain about why they have to entrust a third party to sell in the OTC market instead of selling directly on Uniswap? Are you afraid that everyone will earn a fee? This is the question of minutiae. Through the OTC over-the-counter block trade, it is also to avoid excessive impact on the market.
The news came out that after so long, UNI’s secondary market performance has not been abnormal. The market shows that although this incident has surprised the people who have not participated in the governance, it is really not that big. The sky hasn’t fallen, everything is as usual.
Posted by:CoinYuppie，Reprinted with attribution to:https://coinyuppie.com/who-was-it-that-sold-1-million-uni/
Coinyuppie is an open information publishing platform, all information provided is not related to the views and positions of coinyuppie, and does not constitute any investment and financial advice. Users are expected to carefully screen and prevent risks.