@TokenLogic has been a crucial contributor to the Aave DAO and is exactly the type of service provider that should be funded and retained to continue the forward motion and growth of the protocol. Their prior work related to growing revenues via liquidity, pools, and new assets has been instrumental.
With that said, this proposal is both expensive and broad-reaching in its scope, not too dissimilar from the original Llama proposal last year that was proposed to be canceled. If TokenLogic is the best service provider for this full array of activities, then the DAO should formalize and approve this proposal, but the community should do its homework on other potential providers to ensure it has all the information it needs to make that decision.
I have been working on a framework for this exact situation that I was planning to propose in short order, but finalized and published this evening in response to this conversation. This proposal outlines a new process for determining key problems facing the DAO and asks for potential service providers to bid on that work vs. the other way around. More information can be found here.
Before voting on this proposal, I believe we should be able to compare the offerings against other major industry players to ensure that Aave is getting the best service at the best price. Multiple other protocols have had similar conversations around both treasury management and financial reporting and Aave should take lessons from those vendor diligence conversations and apply them here.
Specifically, I would like to see proposals from more vendors on both of these topics, such as:
- Financial reporting: Messari, Steakhouse, r3gen finance
- Treasury management: Karpatkey, Avantgarde, Llama, Alastor, Mimic
and more…
The community and the protocol will benefit from a competitive bidding process for this work and, if selected, TokenLogic will be validated as the best suited for this role.