On Friday, the Uniswap Foundation announced that it was postponing a key vote on upgrading the protocol's governance structure and fee mechanism to better reward UNI governance token holders. 😮

The foundation apologized for the situation because the decision was “unexpected.” However, this is not the first or only time when the interests of token holders conflict with the interests of other “stakeholders” in Uniswap. 🤔

Uniswap launched its UNI token following the “Summer of DeFi” in 2020 to fend off something known as the “vampire attack” of Sushiswap. Sushiswap has been seen as relatively more community-oriented as it is governed by a DAO and directs transaction fees to token holders. 🍣

Version 2 of Uniswap included code that would ensure that 0.3% of transaction fees would be paid to liquidity providers (or those providing tokens to be traded on the decentralized exchange) and the remaining 0.05% would go to UNI token holders. But the “fee key” was never activated. 😅

It is unclear exactly what concerns the Uniswap Foundation responded to by deciding to postpone the vote once again. However, there is no need to be completely cynical here to suggest that UNI token holders will never be fully rewarded. Uniswap Labs and UNI token holders are separate entities with their own interests; ideally, both will be aligned to do what is best for the protocol itself. 🚀

If there's a lesson to be learned in DeFi, it's that token holders don't always get the final say. What are you thinking? I'm waiting for your comments! 🎤#DeFi#Uniswap #blockchain