# Cp0x: Introduction as Delegate **URL:** \ **Category:** Delegates\ **Tags:** delegate-intro\ **Created:** [April 15, 2025, 6:35pm UTC](https://forum.cow.fi/t/cp0x-introduction-as-delegate/2965 "2025-04-15T18:35:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex013/user_avatar/forum.cow.fi/cp0x/32/1483_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.cow.fi/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2025, 5:14pm UTC](https://forum.cow.fi/t/cp0x-introduction-as-delegate/2965/21 "2025-12-17T17:14:40Z")
### [CIP-80: CoW DAO Grants 2026 Renewal](https://snapshot.box/#/s:cow.eth/proposal/0xffc1affd1b4a75cc917b9880768b7eb23bd07e77677cc8ac60bbfcf2bd919335) * * * > [@CIP-80: CoW DAO Grants 2026 Renewal - CI/CD](https://forum.cow.fi/t/cip-80-cow-dao-grants-2026-renewal-ci-cd/3280/7): > > I voted AGAINST It’s difficult for me to evaluate the quality of the grant work being carried out, but I’ve seen the inception of grants, their poor results, and their rethinking in Arbitrum. Based on this experience, I see what could be improved: Conduct elections for the decision-making committee (the same people have been in place for several years). I’m a proponent of decentralization and competition, and it’s crucial who chooses who gets grants. Introduce more specific KPIs (we need … * * * Vote: **AGAINST** ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex013/user_avatar/forum.cow.fi/cp0x/32/1483_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.cow.fi/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2025, 5:20pm UTC](https://forum.cow.fi/t/cp0x-introduction-as-delegate/2965/22 "2025-12-17T17:20:25Z")
### [CIP-81: Whitelist “Generalized Wrappers” as Solvers](https://snapshot.box/#/s:cow.eth/proposal/0x14f703d398343e6e963136cef0082ce88e96c307cf33099bb1faf270863d6f4d) * * * > [@CIP-81: Whitelist "Generalized Wrappers" as Solvers](https://forum.cow.fi/t/cip-81-whitelist-generalized-wrappers-as-solvers/3294/5): > > I voted FOR. This is one of those votes where we see the protocol developing, and it’s quite promising, with many potential partnerships. We see that AAVE has already partnered with the protocol within AAVE itself, and now CoW may also have a reverse integration. * * * Vote: **FOR** ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex013/user_avatar/forum.cow.fi/cp0x/32/1483_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.cow.fi/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2026, 1:42pm UTC](https://forum.cow.fi/t/cp0x-introduction-as-delegate/2965/23 "2026-04-01T13:42:08Z")
# [CIP-84: CoW Swap Affiliate Program Framework](https://snapshot.box/#/s:cow.eth/proposal/0xfc6e96cf715be1ca1b36ca65892d8505222368a741933c828a30c6b3e224de28) * * * A scheme for attracting new traders, where both receive rewards: • Affiliate • Trader A huge drawback is that the amounts and conditions will be determined by an unelected team with 100x ranges for both tasks and rewards. In fact, it would be possible to impose no restrictions and say the team will choose as they please, and that’s definitely a bad option. I understand that if the rules were set out in advance, there would be an influx of capital prepared for these conditions, but that’s the goal of the project: to organize a system that minimizes such risks while remaining fair. * * * Vote: **AGAINST** ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex013/user_avatar/forum.cow.fi/cp0x/32/1483_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.cow.fi/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2026, 1:48pm UTC](https://forum.cow.fi/t/cp0x-introduction-as-delegate/2965/24 "2026-04-01T13:48:59Z")
# [CIP-85: Performance and Consistency Rewards](https://snapshot.box/#/s:cow.eth/proposal/0xb488c343df3ba5f3857a4c7a920a74e18c13a2cdce99d27af34216803da6abff) * * * Protocol revenues are split: - 50% to solvers - 50% to the DAO Previously, the DAO took about 30-40%, and solvers 60-70%. 1. On the one hand, this is good for the DAO. But on the other hand, solver revenues were only raised six months ago, and a further 1.5-fold reduction could significantly impact some solvers’ departure. Furthermore, this 50% is split equally between • auction winners • for stable work and participation Thus, the winners receive only 25%, meaning a 3x reduction in profits. 2. Why this might not be beneficial for the DAO? Currently, the team is paid $12 million annually, and the DAO’s profits are apparently insufficient to cover this (I would like to see some kind of precise report for the last six months). Therefore, the desire to increase the DAO’s revenue could be to cover these expenses. That’s why it’s difficult to decide in favor of this proposal. * * * Vote: **ABSTAIN** ---
**Author:** ![cp0x](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex013/user_avatar/forum.cow.fi/cp0x/32/1483_2.png) [@cp0x](https://forum.cow.fi/u/cp0x)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2026, 5:44pm UTC](https://forum.cow.fi/t/cp0x-introduction-as-delegate/2965/25 "2026-04-30T17:44:28Z")
# [CIP-86: Discretionary grants program for victims of the cow.fi domain hijacking](https://snapshot.box/#/s:cow.eth/proposal/0x0b4b1fd167f5423008cfdefedfd3249c99e7e41ebb0bc9ec47fef9ee47788493) * * * I support this decision. Even though there was no protocol hack, some of the responsibility lies with the project, which uses DNS servers and providers (which the user cannot influence). I believe the payment is necessary: - the user trusts the project as a whole, not a specific contract, and such a payment will maintain user trust and encourage them to continue using the product. - if this is not done, user churn could significantly reduce profits (of course, this is impossible to calculate). * * * Vote: **FOR** [Previous page](https://forum.cow.fi/t/cp0x-introduction-as-delegate/2965.md?page=1)