[ARFC] Aave | Flipside Crypto Facilitator [v2]

Title: [ARFC] Aave | Flipside Crypto Facilitator [v2]

Author: Flipside Crypto

Date: 07-11-2023

Aave | Flipside Crypto Facilitator [v2]


This proposal aims to progress a 6-month relationship between Aave and Flipside Crypto, creating sustainable frameworks, resources, and operational support.

This proposal incorporates key feedback from existing service providers and the community, shifting the scope to focus on existing capabilities and operational efficiency.


Flipside has been a long-standing steward of Aave, contributing to multiple initiatives. We have been a previous grant recipient, 2nd ever delegate, and strategic growth partner.

This proposal seeks to cement Flipside’s role and further invest in services and resources toward a more sustainable, more engaged, and clearer future.

In particular, the proposal addresses increased diversity in the delegate base, up-to-date documentation, framework development, data availability, and community resources.

This proposal is aimed to be a low-cost way of introducing and investing in these services while encouraging delivery and a short renewal.


To initiate the service contract, a stream of the allocated budget will be activated, with flipsidecrypto2.eth (0x1ef753934C40a72a60EaB12A68B6f8854439AA78) as the recipient.

In terms of technical implementation, the AIP will call the createStream()method of the IAaveEcosystemReserveController interface to create a 180-day stream of 125,000 USDC. If successful, Flipside will offer and perform the following services on a 6-month basis:

Services & KPIs:

1. Operational Efficiency

  • Contribute to and update documentation related to Governance Guide
    • Add, update, and maintain content for relevant topics and key functions:
      I. TEMP CHECKs & ARFCs
      II. Delegates & Code of Conducts
      III. Asset Listing & Network Deployments
      IV. New & Existing Voting Assets
      V. Service Providers & Directory
    • Confirm and verify with contributors before merging changes
    • Create synergy between docs and the latest forum discussions
    • Empower individual contributors, promote education
  • Prospect and advise teams to create new UI and tooling for surfacing delegates
  • Poll, label, and create a directory of delegates by their interests and skills:
    • i.e. Wintermute = Risk, Incentives
    • LBS, Michigan = Growth, Integrations
  • Whitelist-compliant Recognized Delegates for publishing Snapshot proposals
  • Refresh the list of Snapshot admins upgrading efficiency & reflecting current stakeholders
    • Run a Snapshot to identify the right stakeholders
  • Help poll and identify a community strategy for proposing and voting on new networks outlined in V3 Governance: Polygon & Avalanche (future, Arbitrum & Optimism)
    • What type of votes works best where? Is it discretionary?

2. DAO Operations & Community Resources

  • Create scalable Governance structures that enable the introduction of GHO alongside the current protocol; discuss and evaluate Governance schedules
  • Experimentation around motivating a greater diversity of delegates/delegators
  • Empower contributors to engage across both Aave and GHO:
    I. Frameworks & code of conduct
    II. Quorum updates and Snapshot refinement
    III. Delegation & incentive alignment
    IV. Establish monthly recurring community calls for more streamlined communication among contributors and the community
  • Attract and integrate 2+ new delegates from stablecoin protocols like MakerDAO
  • Ensure adherence to the Governance process by proposing teams, notifying and assisting proposers in replies: Supply Cap Community Prop

3. Governance

  • Coordinate and submit Snapshot votes & AIPs on-chain (for free, for anyone)
  • Actively participate in Aave’s governance discussions & votes (abstaining in instances that Flipside proposes votes)
  • Experimenting and helping design a“pooled delegation” mechanism; allowing users and contributors to access proposition power in a permissionless manner, as a public good
  • Vet and assist with prospective proposals by third-party stakeholders
    • Advise on new Governance structures and integrations
    • Integrate aTokens as a votable asset in Optimism by EoQ3
    • Report on and evaluate the success of “private voting” via data analysis
    • Develop a framework for expedited off-chain Governance processes
  • Execute and progress revenue-generating proposals such as deployments (Base, Zk Sync Era, and Linea), asset additions (FRAX & ARB), et al.

4. Data Analysis & Research

  • Create custom Aave data tables for contributors to be accessed via API
  • Curate and maintain open-source Aave-specific data tables (Snapshot, GHO, v2 & v3) enabling cross-chain analyses and comparisons
  • Provide insights and recommendations to the Aave community, similar to those provided in comments such as the following: Butter – Follow Up
  • Maintain and build dashboards to judge and evaluate key initiatives:
    I. Aave Governance (participation, token holders, delegation)
    II. GHO growth and user base
  • Analyze the results of Governance focused proposals and initiatives; measure and recommend changes toward increased voter participation
  • Create greater educational and marketing resources via community analytics
  • Report on the efficacy of asset additions and use across different V3 markets
  • Enable Aave ecosystem developers via Flipside’s API

These deliverables will be communicated with the community as they happen, will the goal of creating more transparent, accountable updates and developments.


Flipside is an independent organization focused on helping blockchains and protocols succeed. We have not been compensated nor commissioned to write this proposal.

Next Steps:

Following sufficient time for community feedback, this proposal will progress to Snapshot for voters’ input. If the Snapshot is successful - an AIP will be prepared and triggered on-chain.


Copyright and related rights waived via CC0.


Flipside has showcased their commitment to the DAO and we’re excited to see the outlined action points mentioned in their proposal.

A lot of work is outlined and so in the case that this proposal passes through Governance, we would recommend that Flipside holds weekly or biweekly updates regarding their progress.


With the ACI, we already gave some feedback during the TEMP CHECK stage.

Flipside published exactly 3 AIPs in 2023. Source

That’s around 5% of the ACI published AIPs amount, and yet the budget required is 50% of the ACI budget.

When we launched the ACI, before considering a potential budget request, it was primordial for us to build a rock-solid track record of Aave contributions, our previous position as part of the Aave Genesis team was not deemed enough for us to ask for a budget, so we had to prove to the DAO our value add.
only after a full quarter of very active & unpaid contributions we published our proposal.

Our current sentiment is that Flipside’s track record is acceptable as a delegate platform but, factually, not there yet as a potential service provider.

At the ACI, we strongly support more diversity, but we remind the community that working for the Aave DAO is an honor and a privilege. The DAO can afford to set the requirement bar high.

The Aave community deserves the best.


Hi Marc –

The “amount of AIP’s published” is not the singular metric by which the DAO should judge an organization’s future success. Nor do we believe it’s a healthy goal for one person to dominate, or control this responsibility.

For us, it too “was primordial for us to build a rock-solid track record of Aave contributions,” we’ve done this for two years but it seems like you’re only focused on AIP stats…

If anything your analysis re-affirms why it is time to invest in Flipside for continued support. Everyone in that list is a service provider / has received funding – except for us. So thank you for publishing it.

It’s a supreme privilege to work for Aave, but soon, if your attitude continues - there won’t be many left.

We’re very excited to increase our commitment to Aave and bring additional balance to the DAO - which it most certainly needs.


I think Flipside has been doing interesting work with Aave in the past and their proposal covers interesting areas and topics for the DAO. I will be supporting this proposal.


Hi @Fig,

We didn’t vote on the [TEMP CHECK]. At TokenLogic, we value Flipside’s contribution to the DAO and want to see more contributors join. However, for this upcoming vote we intend to vote NAY.

In our opinion, the highest impact tasks listed in the proposal can be cherry picked and funded via AGD. Of the nice to haves, we think ACI and other contributors will naturally tick off some of these tasks. For example, we have drafted a proposal to refresh of the Snapshot admins, purely motivated to ensure we can submit Snapshots. There is also the GHO dashboard that we have delivered.

@MarcZeller, TokenLogic wrote the following proposals, payloads and submitted associated AIPs. These may be picked up as Llama via Dune, as we share the same proposal power address.


I’m supportive of this proposal.

I view Flipside as professional, dedicated to the DAO, and possessive of specific qualities and skills that would add value to the DAO if expressed through paid service provision.

Compared to other providers the cost is reasonable, and I think it makes sense for the DAOs tasks to be spread out amongst a variety of providers - this has proven to be positive on the risk provider side of the DAO. Key man risk could become a real concern for the DAO if all tasks get swept up by one or two providers - it could also spread these providers too thin and mean not enough focus is placed on incredibly important areas.

I particularly think their proposed focus on operations would add value to the DAO. Given the complexity of the DAO, a provider focused on operational efficiency for governance could help enable greater coordination and easier access for those looking to partake in the AaveDAO - I could see this having compounding benefits if it goes well given the importance of the DAO and governance process for the protocol and it’s development.


Hi Matt –

This reads more as a resume builder than an attempt to weigh in constructively.

Flipside has been approached by TokenLogic to co-author growth proposals. We have been told by your team that it is an appropriate time for our contributor scope – and deserving.

To respond to your AGD suggestion, we have invested in Aave for years, plus serve on the Grants ourselves (COI). Grants are not a sustainable option nor is it an appropriate incentive.

We’re confident in this scope and the value it provides to Aave and are prepared to move it forward.

On delegated voting power: it’s important to note this prop power comes from AGD. It is not proprietary to Llama, TokenLogic, or anyone else – but Aave Grants DAO.

It is best not to sell it as a benefit.


Appreciate the effort of @Flipside and its representative @fig on the new version of the proposal.
In parallel the community is commenting on other threads about strategies regarding service providers, and I think it can give some value to analyze point by point what is proposed here.

  1. Operational efficiency.

    • Governance Guide. GIVES VALUE, REQUIRES SOLVING REDUNDANCY. A really important one, but it should be tackled by 1 entity with feedback from others, so or Flipside with this proposal or ACI.
    • Advise teams on UI for delegates. REDUNDANT. The DAO has been investing incredibly big capital in AGD for almost 2 years, and precisely on this item too. One question is how effective this has been (I think hasn’t been enough), but it should not be part of a new engagement.
    • Poll about delegates. NO VALUE. It should be up to delegates to present and promote their interests and specialization, not to a paid entity by the DAO to surface that.
    • Recognized Delegates whitelisting and Snapshot admin. GIVES VALUE.
    • Community strategy for proposing and voting on new networks. GIVES VALUE. Agree this is important, given that by default governance v3 will allow voting on any of the whitelisting networks (per proposal only in one though).
  2. DAO Operations.

    • Scalable governance structures, the introduction of GHO. ABSTRACT, NO VALUE. Not specific and boiling down to an ecosystem to be developed still like Gho, or even the protocol. The DAO should not engage service providers on it.
    • Experimentation about motivating diversity of delegates. GIVES VALUE, POTENTIALLY REDUNDANT. Promoting new delegates is a net positive for the ecosystem, but how does this overlap with ACI?
    • Empower contributors to engage in the ecosystem. GIVES VALUE. AGD organizing community calls doesn’t make any sense, so this sounds like net positive. About quorum updates and Snapshot refinement, not sure.
    • Attract 2 new delegates. GIVES VALUE. Not much to comment on, as it is positive.
    • Ensure adherence to the governance process. REDUNDANT. How this fits with ACI?
  3. Governance

    • Coordination and submit Snapshot votes. REDUNDANT. With ACI.
    • Participation in governance discussions and votes. ABSTRACT, PROBABLY GIVES VALUE. Is this a delegate component?
    • Pooled delegation. GIVES VALUE, POTENTIALLY REDUNDANT. Same as others, ACI?
    • Proposals by third parties. SOME GIVE VALUE. Too heterogeneous I would say, but generally gives value.
    • Execute revenue-generating proposals. TOO HETEROGENEOUS, PARTIALLY REDUNDANT. This is a good example of what is discussed on a different thread atm: diluted scope that simply is out of expertise. On listings currently, it gives value, but it is something that should be minor work that third parties could tackle over time. Also redundant with ACI?
      Regarding deployments, even if it making it straightforward, it is something that basically boils down to development, risk and security, so doesn’t really make sense for Flipside to cover.
  4. Data Analysis & Research
    NOT ALIGNED THIS TYPE OF ENGAGEMENT On this point the consideration is general: Aave DAO has invested via AGD a considerable budget in analytics and data surfacing and probably should stop until the value is shown.
    I’m not undermining Flipside platform or saying is not useful, but as somebody that is pretty familiar with the ecosystem in all layers, I don’t think the DAO should be engaging a service provider on this; maximum grant. Also considerating that by itself, this acts as promotion of the engaged analytics platform.

My summary is:

  • ~50% of the points give value to the community, which implies it makes sense to compensate.
  • Still, important redundancy, which must be solved. This is not a matter of supporting one provider or another, is a matter of the DAO paying the bills.
  • Data analytics is not really aligned with the rest of the items, and should not be included. Debatably, is not even something the DAO should pursue, especially if it is not “native” and based on a third-party platform.

As with my feedback regarding the previous proposal, the work put on this analysis of mine tries to show appreciation for the history of @Flipside in the community, but again, both scope (and budget) are AGAINST for me.

What I definitely see as problematic regarding a proposal like this (this is self-criticism for the community, not Flipside at all) is the lack of constructive feedback and a rational standpoint.

The majority of the comments here are boiling down to:

  • We like Flipside because they participated in the past, so content seems secondary.
  • Too competitive standpoint.
  • Where are the delegates constructive feedback?


Thanks @eboado for taking the care to look at the scope and share your perspective.

While we may disagree on some of the classifications, your reply calls out important areas for clarity.

It mentions: "GIVES VALUE” 9 times, “REDUNDANT” 5 times, and “NO VALUE” 2 times. Even under this assessment, more than 50% of our scope nails the mark and outweighs the other critiques.

On the topic of redundancy, we are comfortable being a competitive proposal and adding redundancy in the DAO. The recent behaviors we have seen illustrate a need for rationality, more professionalism, and allowing teams to specialize.

Redundancy was added in the risk process, in development, in audit…

To address your refrences of ACI: why is he qualified for Governance? What past public Governance engagements or proposals were created outside of Aave?

His ETHCC presentation directly ripped graphics from our V1 proposal [without credit] which is great

It’s crucial to note that while the line items are important, it seems to miss the true goals of this proposal.

This proposal is to offer support to Aave and its users – the bullets we outline are some of the tools (but not all) that we use to deliver this to the ecosystem in a pivotal time of its maturity. Let’s look at those outcomes as a better basis to evaluate the need and importance.

Once again, we think this is a fair price and short term which allows Aave to quickly evaluate the value we provide. You’re right – Flipside has been here before, it’s a natural, healthy progression within the DAO and an opportunity for you and others to reward strong work and value-additive behaviors.

What we see as a true problem is the inability for delegates and stakeholders to express an alternative opinion without the recourse of going against yourself and the DAO’s largest voter


No, this kind of approach is the actual problem. Trying to make this some kind of tribalist decision on where only 1 entity survives.

I will be clearer:

  • I care 0 about who provides services to the DAO, if 1) whoever does is prepared and with a good track record 2) the scope is useful 3) the budget is aligned with the previous 2 points.
    This proposal fulfills 1), and partially 2) and 3).

  • I tried to be clear on the REDUNDANT points, and POTENTIALLY REDUNDANT, but again seems misinterpreted.
    Some cases are redundant and that’s it, like “advising teams on UI for delegates”. I’m not really here to propose a solution, but something like this would make sense: present the aggregated grants given by AGD on that → comment that is over expenses → propose a plan that both saves the capital of the DAO and is actually effective.
    With items about ACI, same story. First, try to comment with ACI if it makes sense for them to maybe “split” some items, if not, explain clearly where the value appears for the community having 2 programs doing exactly the same. For example, on “Coordination and submit Snapshot votes” from what I understand, ACI’s Skyward program helps everybody to follow the governance process, no matter who, content (if not malicious obviously), or any other circumstances. If any behavior of denying Skyward to anybody would be detected, that would be clear misconduct from ACI of course.
    Why this needs redundancy? And let’s stop with the abstract concepts of “sake of decentralization”, etc on this part: this is operational of the DAO supporting external entities, not something to decentralize.

This is simple, I’m not supporting a proposal if I think an important part (e.g. the whole point 4?) is something the DAO should not pay for. This is not a matter if Flipside should be “rewarded” or not for previous contributions, which I’m not removing value from.
Everybody is free to comment, interpret my feedback and vote however they want; I think the time spent on analyzing this from my side should speak for itself.

The ARFC vote has passed in favor, surpassing the 80k differential.

Over 1,150,000+ voting power participated, the most in Aave’s Snapshot history.

Some stats:

10,504 YAE votes (80.75%)
2,408 NAY votes (18.51%)
96 ABSTAIN votes (0.74%)

In terms of next steps, we intend to work with the community to ensure we may effectively service key needs before an AIP. In particular, we hope to work with those who are most critical of our proposal.

I speak for many by saying Aave has been the most exciting and interesting DAO in the space over the past few weeks and we are grateful to be part of it.


We are honored for the Aave community’s trust and endorsement of the ARFC – thanks again for your effort to help get us here.

We’re deeply grateful for the support from delegates, feedback from existing service providers, and patience throughout the proposal process. After lengthy discussions internally, Flipside has decided not to progress this proposal toward an AIP.

Instead, we will remain a devoted delegate and continue providing the same level of dedication to the DAO that we have since launching our platform.

This Governance process has illuminated and magnified the current dynamics within the DAO and we feel our most impactful work may be done as a neutral third party. Particularly, with shifting and consolidating power, independent teams must remain to uphold the integrity and responsibility of the DAO.

Flipside is excited and committed to remaining in the delegate role in Aave and contributing objectively to its future.

We pledge to continue supporting growth, accountability, and sustainability for Aave while empowering new stakeholders. We will do this in the same way, bringing candor and data-driven insights to support key decision-making needs for Aave.


This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.