Thanks for this proposal, it is really great work 
I see many advantages in this architecture. Aave needs to evolve to continue embrace rapide pace innovations of DeFi and current structure does not allow to properly scale money market.
Sillos organisation seems to me like decentralizing the risk of each money market which is great. It empowers users and rewards at a better granularity their participation in the protocols market. At their risk.
Bonding curve :
As mentioned by @Zer0dot in his 4/ I also do not like the fact that rescue found liquidity providers will bear price fluctuations and insurance providing risk. A different design in the bonding curve could fix this.
I suggest a logarithmic curve for $aDAO exchanges. It will drastically reduce the risk of price fluctuation after reaching large amounts of founds while maintaining extra avantage for early comers.
Initial aDAOS
The Two aDAOs model is ok to me. It gives more choice to users and I assume we do not all expect to bear risk for $BTC as much as $YFI.
aDAO creation
The “stake to create” design seems nice. 5% quorum is nonetheless too much in my opinion. I would suggest 2 or 4% depending of community opinion.
Something interesting in this proposal is the fact that AAVE treasury will be dedicate to builders that will makes us closer to the ghost superstructure of DeFi we want to be.
Rewarding stkAAVE for their risk is not the most efficient utilisation of AAVE funds and your proposal also reasons to me after the recent talks regarding AAVE treasury management discussions.
This proposal should be known by most of community stakeholders because of all the changes it implicates. I can’t argue more with @oaksprout on the need to make it more accessible with different levels of details.