Curve DAO Funding Proposal Debate
Curve DAO members have raised concerns over a recent proposal by Curve Finance founder Michael Egorov, who has requested 21 million CRV tokens, valued at approximately $6.3 million, to support ongoing development efforts.
The proposal has sparked debate within the community, with many calling for greater transparency and detailed information on how the funds will be utilized.
Egorov submitted the proposal on Aug. 19, seeking a substantial portion of the DAO’s Community Fund to support the continued research and development of Curve’s key components. Swiss Stake, a key contributor to the DeFi protocol, has been instrumental in developing the platform’s stable swap mechanism and governance system.
The proposed funds would be used to maintain the company’s 25-person team and to continue research and development efforts. However, the request represents a marked shift from the DAO’s usual practices, which have traditionally been more conservative in deploying community resources.
Lack of clarity
The proposal has drawn criticism from community members who argue that it lacks essential details, including a clear roadmap, specific milestones, and a detailed breakdown of how the funds will be spent. This lack of clarity has fueled skepticism about the necessity and timing of the request.
Many members have already made clear that they do not intend to support the proposal in its current form. One influential member, who holds a substantial amount of CRV tokens, voiced opposition by stating:
“Without a clear plan and detailed expenditure, I cannot support this proposal. I intend to vote against it.”
The proposed allocation, nearly half of the Community Fund’s current holdings of 47.5 million CRV, has raised additional questions about the long-term sustainability of such funding practices. Critics worry that approving this request could set a precedent that may strain the DAO’s financial resources in the future.
Legal concerns
In response to these concerns, Egorov acknowledged that the proposal represents a significant “cultural shift” for the DAO, noting that it diverges from the Community Fund’s traditional, more conservative use.
He explained that legal advice had influenced the level of detail he could provide in the proposal and emphasized that while the proposal might seem less transparent due to these constraints, he intended to mitigate any concerns by committing to regular bi-annual reports that would detail how the funds were being used.
He also assured the community that any unused portions of the allocated funds would be rolled over to the following year, ensuring that the funds would be managed responsibly and with continued oversight.
Additionally, Egorov proposed that any future funding requests would include more detailed documentation, aligning with the community’s expectations for transparency and accountability.
