202 total views
Since the DeFi concept emerged in the summer of 2020, Decentralized Finance has come a long way. Many new projects were launched, many new concepts were formed and developed. Among them, DAO is considered one of the pillars that make up the entire DeFi industry today. But does DAO really work as effectively as the “beautiful words” that the community is praising?
DAO stories laugh out loud
Juno decided to withdraw the token himself
Juno would be a normal project like many other DeFi projects, if it weren’t for the story of the Juno community opening a vote to confiscate the JUNO airdrop tokens of the “whale” wallet. Just for one simple reason:
The project did not anticipate having a whale wallet receive a large amount of token airdrops – fearing that it would affect its fledgling network. (?!)
The proposal was then approved, albeit based on “Code is Law” – it is perfectly legal for a whale wallet to receive such tokens.
However, the drama is still long. After approving the decision to confiscate the token, the project conducted a hard fork of the blockchain but then waited forever to see the token transferred, while the whale’s wallet has already deducted the money…
After a while of checking, they were shocked when they discovered that instead of copying and pasting the receiving wallet address into the upgrade code, they had mistakenly pasted the transaction hash. As a result, the $36 million worth of tokens was sent to “nothing”.
Through this story, the community realized:
Regardless of whether it is a DAO or a “voting community”, it is all for the purposes of the project team only.
Merit Circle vs. Yield Guild Games
Again a game of “flipping” of DAO.
DAO Merit Circle (MC) admin account “HoneyBarrel” suddenly proposed one day exhorting everyone to find a way to “dismiss” the investor status of Yield Guild Games (YGG), terminate the cooperation relationship, ready to buy back the MC tokens that YGG is holding. And the reason given is:
YGG does not help Merit Circle as what YGG committed when agreeing to invest in the seed round. (?!)
However, the deeper reason is still that the DAO does not want YGG, a gaming guild that is considered a direct competitor of Merit Circle, to hold such a large amount of MC tokens. So decided not to do what was committed in SAFT
SAFT is a type of contract signed between the project and the VC in the pre-sale rounds.
Although this story has ended peacefully, we – both individual investors and large funds – ask the question that:
Is the decision power of the DAO higher than what was committed in SAFT? Although the VC signed SAFT to invest the project’s tokens in the pre-sale rounds, the DAO then still has the right to vote to “cancel SAFT”, not deliver the token as committed? Just because “DAO represents the will of the community”?
Tribe – Fei . “dictator knife”
After the Fei-Rari alliance disbanded, everything seemed to have come to an end: a TIP-112 proposal was submitted to repay outstanding debts.
Almost immediately, however, the team implemented a veto (veto) of the previous TIP-112 proposal. And the funny thing is:
After the Tribe team left open the possibility of “stopping refunds”, the majority of votes subsequently moved in this direction. (?!)
Whatever the reason, this case makes it clear that the DAO is purely “anonymous”. Any vote seems to depend entirely on the wishes of the project team, not the community.
The project team wants a refund? OK, DAO vote refund.
Now the project doesn’t want to refund anymore? OK vote veto.
This dictatorship became the subject of memes of ridicule in the community.
protocol governance explained
which color lambo should the founder buy?
▓▓░░░░░░░░░ 11% – Yellow
89% – Black
founder: but i like yellow
96% – Yellow 4% – Black
— G 跻 Goblin of the (@DegenSpartan)
May 14, 2022
“Community, what color lambo should the project owner buy now?
Yellow – 11% Black – 89%
Project owner: yes but I like yellow
And the result is:
Yellow – 96% Black – 4%”
Solend proposes to take control of whale wallets
If the humorous DAO stories mentioned above are not too familiar to many readers, the following Solend story has probably spread throughout the crypto community around the world.
If I wanted to tell this story in one short line, it would be:
Solend lends money but is afraid that the liquidated whale wallet will affect the project, so the team proposes to vote to take over this wallet to handle it themselves. (?!)
Those interested can watch this drama-filled process here: Solend proposes to take control of the “whale wallet” to avoid the liquidation of $ 108 million SOL.
“The community DAO will vote on this and make the final decision”
— sassal.eth 🦇🔊🐼 (@sassal0x)
June 23, 2022
“DAO will vote and make the final decision”
“We and the investors will make sure the vote goes the way we want it to.”
Decentralization has always been the spirit of the whole crypto market. The purpose of the DAO is also the same – to bring a new form of management in the hope of “decentralization”.
However, there is no concept that does not go through the “golden test”. The problems of the DAO are still there waiting for us to find a solution.
Vitalik Buterin, the father of Ethereum that underpins the entire DeFi array today, has also repeatedly pointed out the shortcomings of DAO governance. One solution that Vitalik is the emergence of Soulbound Token.
And no matter what method or technology is used, voting in the DAO must really be “empowering the community”. Let users make decisions about the future of the project, not just following the “will” of the dev team or “big-handed” investors.
Maybe you are interested:Maybe you are interested:
#Ton #tragedycomedy #named #DAO