The most popular DEX on Ethereum just had it first governance proposal and the voting failed. 

 ![01.png](https://images.hive.blog/DQmVKqAkwFUDnt7uBsVaubkvRgVCEYC9K31qTrQFr1nfSYZ/01.png)
https://app.uniswap.org/#/vote/1


For some of you that got lucky and got some UNI coins, just in case you didn’t knew the key utility of the UNI token is governance.

Here are the things that at the moment the UNI tokens holder control:
-	Uniswap governance
-	UNI community treasury
-	The protocol fee switch
-	uniswap.eth ENS name
-	Uniswap Default List (tokens.uniswap.eth)
-	SOCKS liquidity tokens

The first proposal was about the the tresholds for making proposlas and the quorum for voting them. 

The current rules are that a **4M** UNI are required to make a proposal and **40M** for a quorum to vote that proposal. These numbers were considered as to high having in mind the total delegated UNI. At the moment of writing this UNI has around 200M tokens in circulation, meaning 40M represent 20% of the current supply. 

The proposal was set to lower the numbers to **3M** for submitting a proposal and **30M** for a quorum to vote a proposal. 

The proposal came from Dhrama who allegedly control a 15M UNI.
> Having followed these discussions from the beginning, Dharma has prepared a proposal that we think achieves the goal of making governance more accessible, while still ensuring that Uniswap governance is not subject to unilateral deleterious actors. We propose a threshold of 3m UNI for proposal submission, and 30m UNI as quorum.


**And the results?**

 ![02.png](https://images.hive.blog/DQmYEtrJSN31bRAEaRHtT3PYjqyxo2kCtydxtcy1bDCfHpi/02.png)

**39.59M voted for!** A 0.41M less than the required quorum. 
The majority of the votes (98%) are almost all for, but the limit of 40M was not met. Talking about a close race!

The irony in the situation is that this failed voting proves the justification of the proposal itself. 40M UNI quorum for a proposal to pass is a lot. At least at the current levels of the UNI supply and the development of the governance system. 
UNI has a relatively high inflation in the first years, so it is expected that in a year time from now this numbers will not be as hard to meet, and the once that are interested in governance will have accumulated enough to be able to make proposals and change the rules of the DEX. 



![03.png](https://images.hive.blog/DQmRmFdRpYpcj45ivvZwPkt1TNtwp18r5JTN65bWgkbyf3F/03.png)
 [link](https://twitter.com/NadavAHollander/status/1318236754923540481?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1318236754923540481%7Ctwgr%5Eshare_3%2Ccontainerclick_0&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.coinspeaker.com%2Funiswap-first-governance-defeat%2F)




The silver lining seems to be that the delegated UNI has increases by 57% from 47M to a 74M. Going forward there should be more quorum for future proposals. 
Not sure are they going to repeat the proposal and try again. I guess they will be measuring their strength before submitting another one. 

----

It is always interesting to follow these governance topics in the blockchain sphere. Especially for protocols and cryptos that have on chain governance. (hint Bitcoin doesn’t have one 😊)
The governance topics can be a lot of fun and emotional. Hive had its spectacular governance fight resulting in a hardfork. 
The governance utility of the tokens seems to be taking a central place for some of the projects. It’s a way to decentralize the project. Let its token holders decide the future. 

All the best
@dalz

Posted Using [LeoFinance <sup>Beta</sup>](https://leofinance.io/hive-167922/@dalz/uniswap-just-had-its-first-governance-proposal-on-vote-and-it-failed)