[TEMP CHECK] Aave Will Win Framework

Governance General
111

Hello,

First of all I want to provide some color on this:

Everything else has been self-funded. This includes the product layer, which encompasses aave.com

because the same has been claimed in the previous post, debunked and frankly is a hit in the face of all the contributors.
app.aave.com was not self funded, it was not developed exclusively by you. You can not just say things.

  • the app was funded by the v3 retroactive funding, the funding request included the “frontend engineering”
  • the app was marketed as “decentralized interface”, the url is just a redirect to the decentralized ipfs deployment (for some time via crust)
  • the apps rpc was funded via grants (pokt/ pocket network)
  • you actively asked other SPs for contributions, and they delivered. address-book while now used by everyone for everything, initially got a js build, because it was painful to maintain the manual address configs in the DAOs UI
  • iirc there was even a snapshot vote to make a decision of HAL should be integrated or not

Also I don’t like this throwing around of numbers to inflate things 3,521 releases, sounds huge, but the fine print is: every commit creates a release. 2718 of these are caused by a bot I created to update a file system cache for governance data, 230 are created by another bot for changes in 18n files.

I’m not claiming that you did not contribute, you contributed more on the fronend than any other service provider combined - which is fair, as you got paid for it. But now just claiming “yes we did this all on our own, any paid for it for altruistic reasons”, is dishonest.

That out of the way, i still love AAVE.
I spent the last 4 years of my live analyzing and improving aave.
First as a hobby, than at labs, again as a hobby and finally at bgd.

I want AAVE to win and therefore urge you to correct course.

If then the original money paid was not enough and you want more to maintain the fontend, so be it. I bet if you would have asked, noone would have objected paying you more.
If you wanted to improve the UX via CowSwap, so be it. I bet if you would have asked, noone would have objected paying you or even doing some rev share.

For this proposal itself, as I said on the previous posts, i personally think it’s the wrong direction. The DAO should own the IP and SPs should pay the DAO (via rev share or similar), otherwise one forces centralization and discourages competition.

I hope the snapshot fails, I hope you come up with something better, for the good of the DAO.

20 Likes