UNIUSD
UNI / United States dollar
crypto Composite

I went down a rabbit hole on how voting actually works on vote.uniswapfoundation.org and the part nobody really talks about is the relayer.
In a plain OpenZeppelin Governor setup, casting an onchain vote is a transaction, so you pay gas. fine for a whale delegate. but if you're sitting on a few hundred UNI of delegated weight, paying real money to vote on a proposal you might be on the losing side of anyway is a genuine disincentive. participation quietly skews toward people who don't notice the gas.
The gasless flow sidesteps that with a relayer. you sign your ballot as an EIP-712 typed message offchain, a relayer submits it onchain and eats the gas. the vote still settles onchain, you just don't pay for the settlement. catch is somebody has to, and right now that somebody is the Uniswap Foundation covering the relayer cost out of its budget. ENS DAO does the exact same thing for its own governance.
which makes gasless voting a subsidy, not a protocol feature. it holds as long as the foundation keeps funding it. if that line item ever gets trimmed, gasless voting doesn't throw an error, it just silently reverts to gas-gated participation and small-delegate turnout craters. feels like relayer funding should be endowed or treated as a protocol-level cost rather than a discretionary foundation expense, and I haven't seen a proposal that actually does that. given how much of current turnout leans on it, that's a strange gap to leave open.

I went down a rabbit hole on how voting actually works on vote.uniswapfoundation.org and the part nobody really talks about is the relayer.
In a plain OpenZeppelin Governor setup, casting an onchain vote is a transaction, so you pay gas. fine for a whale delegate. but if you're sitting on a few hundred UNI of delegated weight, paying real money to vote on a proposal you might be on the losing side of anyway is a genuine disincentive. participation quietly skews toward people who don't notice the gas.
The gasless flow sidesteps that with a relayer. you sign your ballot as an EIP-712 typed message offchain, a relayer submits it onchain and eats the gas. the vote still settles onchain, you just don't pay for the settlement. catch is somebody has to, and right now that somebody is the Uniswap Foundation covering the relayer cost out of its budget. ENS DAO does the exact same thing for its own governance.
which makes gasless voting a subsidy, not a protocol feature. it holds as long as the foundation keeps funding it. if that line item ever gets trimmed, gasless voting doesn't throw an error, it just silently reverts to gas-gated participation and small-delegate turnout craters. feels like relayer funding should be endowed or treated as a protocol-level cost rather than a discretionary foundation expense, and I haven't seen a proposal that actually does that. given how much of current turnout leans on it, that's a strange gap to leave open.