awesome

Briefly explain the ins and outs of the $aave incident.

1. The second largest whale has cut losses and liquidated.

Clearing out 230,000 AAVE (approximately 38 million USD)
Average price 223 → 165 USD, a loss of about 13.45 million
Directly triggered a short-term plunge of about 12% in AAVE.

2. Tipping Point: The Flow of Costs Quietly Changes

The Aave front-end exchange function has switched from ParaSwap to Cow Swap.
Related additional fees from Aave DAO treasury → Aave Labs team address
The annual income scale may exceed 10 million dollars.
The lack of prior communication and unclear disclosure has led to strong dissatisfaction within the community.

3. Core contradiction: Who really calls the shots in Aave?

Aave Labs Position:
The front end and product belong to the team, and the company has the right to profit. The money given to the DAO in the past was only a "donation."
Community Position:
The value of the Aave brand and ecosystem comes from the DAO and token holders and should not be privatized by the team.

4. Escalation of Contradictions: Proposal for Brand Control

Former CTO proposed: to hand over Aave brand assets (domain name, social media, naming rights) to DAO control.
The community is widely supportive, and discussions are extremely intense.
The essence is in the challenge: Can the team still "control Aave"?

5. Founder's statement out of control

Stani opposes the proposal, believing that the process is hasty and the legalities are complex.
Under the current sentiment, it is interpreted as "the founder opposes the brand being held by token holders"
Community trust has further broken down, with extreme rhetoric and liquidation sentiment emerging.

This time, Aave may not be facing a short-term bearish sentiment, but rather a concentrated questioning of its governance structure and the boundaries of rights and responsibilities.
1. Agreement ≠ Product, but who does the brand belong to?
2. Can the team change the key revenue allocation without going through the DAO?
3. Does the DAO have ultimate control over "real-world assets" (brands, front-end, discourse power)?

Under the current sentiment, interpreted as "the founder opposes the brand being held by token holders"
Community trust further fractures, extreme rhetoric and liquidation sentiment emerge.
This time, Aave may not be facing short-term bearishness, but rather a concentrated questioning of Aave's governance structure and the boundaries of its powers and responsibilities.
Agreement ≠ Product, but who does the brand belong to?
Can the team change the key revenue allocation without going through the DAO?
Is there ultimate control over linguistic rights? 1,