The Aave token falls 11% amid controversy over pushing for a unilateral vote.

Source: Yellow Original Title: Aave token falls 11% amid controversy over pushing for a unilateral vote

Original Link: Aave Labs sparked a strong reaction on Monday by unilaterally advancing a governance proposal to a vote without notifying its author.

This proposal escalated tensions over who controls the brand assets of the DeFi protocol.

Ernesto Boado, co-founder of BGD Labs and former CTO of Aave, publicly disavowed the presentation on Snapshot.

“This is not, in terms of its spirit, my proposal,” Boado stated in X.

“Aave Labs has unilaterally rushed my proposal to a vote, with my name on it and without notifying me at all.”

The AAVE token fell by 11% in 24 hours following the controversy.

What happened

The proposal by Boado on December 16 seeks to transfer control of the Aave domains, social media accounts, and the naming rights of the current administrators to an entity controlled by the DAO.

The specification requires that the parties currently controlling these assets transfer them to a vehicle with “strong anti-capture protections.”

Aave Labs brought the proposal to a vote on Snapshot on December 22 after what it described as five days of debate.

Boado emphasized that the action “breaks all codes of trust with the community” during what had been a productive debate in the forum.

Marc Zeller, from Aave Chan Initiative, criticized the timing, pointing out that the holiday period reduces coordination among large holders.

He described the move as an escalation “without resolving the debate, without a clear consensus, and without Boado's consent.”

The founder of Aave, Stani Kulechov, defended the expedited voting as correct from a procedural standpoint.

“The debate has been going on for more than 5 days with different opinions and points of view,” said Kulechov, arguing that the Snapshot complies with the governance frameworks.

Why it matters

The dispute highlights fundamental tensions when founding teams maintain private companies alongside supposedly decentralized protocols.

Boado's proposal arose from concerns that brand assets allow for the “private monetization” of products over which the DAO has no practical control.

Recent friction points include Aave Labs replacing a DEX platform with another integration, redirecting about 10 million dollars annually in fees from the DAO's treasury.

The controversy erupts despite regulatory victories for Aave Labs, including authorization under MiCA and the filing of regulatory investigations.

Critics argue that the distinction between the components of “protocol” governed by the DAO and the “product” layers controlled by Labs allows for value extraction.

The outcome will test whether DAOs can control brands and interfaces that are typically found off-chain, where governance is slower and rights are more diffuse.