UniswapWe vote against this proposal because of a couple of reasons as below: - We don't consider the problem statement of this proposal is strong enough for the DAO to build a new function/contract by paying the cost. There has been ways for delegates who want to make a proposal and don't possess an enough VP to do so; you can ask other delegates with enough VP to sponsor one or with the Foundation's temporary delegation. We agree that it's the best for an author to make a proposal by themselves, but also believe it's not an urgent issue for the DAO to address at this moment. - We are against the idea that this "proposal factory" also votes on proposals with 20M VP delegated. If it were to be implemented, its scope is only making a proposal, not voting, and with the minimium required delegation to be eligible for making proposals (1M). - As blockful suggested, we believe it's best for users (in this case, delegates) to be integrated into Tally, rather than commissioning another service provider with an additional cost because Tally has been the main frontend for Uniswap onchain governance and a Service Provider for the very service.