I read an interesting post by Sunny Aggarwal about how Uniswap could consist of a network of DAOs competing in a free market to offer the best value to users.
In terms of governance, he suggested that such Uniswap DAOs could vote on:
a. Automated Market Making Curve Function
b. Fee Model
What happens when you want to try something new, but can’t win the governance vote? Sunny suggested that there could be a DAO fork:
"Just like the ability to fork holds chain governance systems in check, the ability to fork Uniswap pools holds its governance systems in check. What this means practically is that in this model, there needn’t be only one liquidity pool per trading pair. Rather, we can have multiple liquidity pools even for the same trading pair. I call this the Uniswap Network — multiple Uniswap DAOs competing with each other in the free market.
For example, two different ETH:DAI liquidity pools could co-exist and compete to find an optimal fee algorithm and curve structure to attract trading volume, while balancing the profit seeking motive of the liquidity providers. If one provides a better model or fee structure, more volume will switch to it, thus potentially earning more fees, and ultimately attracting more liquidity providers from the other pool."
Note that this opportunity extends beyond Uniswap and exists in any situation where a market maker or liquidity pool is used.
How could Aragon provide tools to serve such promising use cases?