Uniswap in Turmoil: Senior DAO Delegate Storms Out Amid Accusations of Centralized Power Play
DeFi’s poster child faces internal revolt as a top governance participant exits loudly—claiming the protocol’s ’decentralized’ label now rings hollow. The move exposes simmering tensions between tokenholders and core developers.
Behind the scenes: Uniswap’s latest proposal sparked accusations of backroom dealing, with critics calling it a velvet-gloved coup. Meanwhile, ETH whales keep stacking fees—because nothing says ’open finance’ like watching your bag appreciate while the peasants fight.
Uniswap Crypto Delegate Calls Out Failings at Uniswap Foundation
https://t.co/tfeJYc4lVT
— PEPO (@0xPEPO) May 5, 2025
In a scathing post on X, he bluntly accused the Foundation of sidelining DAO voices, ignoring delegate criticism, and insulating itself from engaging meaningfully with feedback.
“The Foundation’s behavior seems to have prioritized insulation over collaboration, and in doing so, may have actively harmed Uniswap,” Pepo wrote.
His departure isn’t just symbolic. It’s a red Flare fired over the bow of the $4B protocol, raising serious doubts about how decentralized Uniswap is.
At the center of the storm is the $165 million treasury grant approved by the DAO in March, money that the Foundation is now using with what critics have lambasted as alarming autonomy.
UniSwap Foundation Attempts to Sweep Drama Under The Carpet
Technically operating as a nonprofit, the Foundation was meant to serve the DAO. But some now argue it’s becoming its own power center, unaccountable and quietly aligned with Uniswap Labs, the for-profit entity that birthed the protocol.
Delegate participation is essential to the success of the Uniswap ecosystem, and the @UniswapFND takes their feedback seriously.
In fact, we are the only major Protocol Foundation that is funded through the express approval of delegates. We were not endowed with tokens at the…
— Devin Walsh (@devinawalsh) May 6, 2025
Devin Walsh, the Foundation’s Executive Director, gave the usual PR gloss: “Delegate participation is essential… we take their feedback seriously.”
But behind the scenes, it’s a different story.
Multiple sources say key decisions are being discussed privately in back channels, hashed out between big wallet holders long before they ever reach the eyes of community forums.
Some delegates call it “DAO theater”, where votes are held after the real calls have already been made like puppetry.
This isn’t the first time decentralization at Uniswap has been questioned. In October, Stanford Blockchain Club’s Billy Gao slammed Uniswap Labs for launching its own blockchain without DAO input, calling it a clear governance failure.
Even the formation of a new “Foundation Feedback Group” on May 1 hasn’t eased tensions. Delegates say it’s too little, too late.
“It’s a loss for any DAO when a delegate feels the only way to make an impact is through stepping down,” said PaperImperium from GFX Labs in comments to CoinDesk.
As UNI token holders wonder who’s really steering the ship, one thing’s clear: decentralization at Uniswap is still a work in progress, and if not a brand illusion, things ought to change quickly.
