Well, this is juicy - lots of new accounts created in the past day, and eyes are on the forum because of this discourse. It is candid and passionate which I believe leads to more engaged forum participants.
A few things I would like to call out (as a somewhat outsider): one factor which is over-prioritized in Aave and other DAOs is a “history of engagement.” While this is valuable - it is very rare.
It is hard to find teams that have engaged as long as organizations like Llama or Gauntlet, especially in a nascent industry. As we mature as an industry, we better hope new tools and solutions are being built.
This mindset of automatically discounting new solutions is predatory, deterring innovation, risk-taking, and invested contributors; if we want to see DAOs succeed, we must be open-minded.
(Side note: it’s also a limitation of Governance)
Now on the merit of Chaos - I can not speak to the technical capabilities of the product but it seems to offer the DAO scalability at fewer resources. Additionally, the modified fee structure feels appropriate.
$500,000 after 6 months of work.
If we are looking to grow Aave 10x, it comes with more scalable ways for people to engage. Chaos feels like it offered hints of that, allowing new participants to use their product and do risk analysis.
@tarun I would ask how would you recommend new teams and products build this track record? Focus on other smaller DAOs? Work for free and pursue retroactive funding?
Curious about your thoughts here.
Also - if any outside team similar to @DiamondRock has interfaced with both products, please chime in. Seems to be an early instance of these teams overlapping, hence the passionate debate.