Can you briefly explain the ins and outs of the AAVE incident 1. Top 2 Whales Cut Meat and Clear Warehouse Clearance of 230000 AAVEs (approximately $38 million) The average price ranges from 223 to 165 US dollars, resulting in a loss of approximately 13.45 million yuan Directly triggering a short-term drop of about 12% in AAVE 2. Trigger: The cost flow quietly changes Aave front-end redemption function switches from ParaSwap to Cow Swap Additional fees related to Aave DAO treasury → Aave Labs team address Annual revenue scale may exceed 10 million US dollars Without prior communication and clear disclosure, it has caused strong dissatisfaction in the community 3. Core contradiction: "Who's the boss of Aave?"? Aave Labs' stance: The front-end and product belong to the team, and the company has the right to make profits. In the past, the money given to DAO was only "donated" Community stance: The Aave brand and ecological value come from DAO and token holders, and should not be privatized by the team 4. Escalation of Contradiction: Proposal for Brand Control Former CTO proposes to transfer Aave brand assets (domain name, social media, naming rights) to DAO control Widely supported by the community, with extremely intense discussions The essence is a challenge: can the team still 'control Aave' 5. Founder's statement goes out of control Stani opposes the proposal, believing that the process is hasty and the law is complex In the current mood, it is interpreted as' founder opposes brand ownership by coin holders' Further breakdown of community trust, emergence of extreme speech and clearance sentiment The potential challenge facing Aave this time may not be short-term negative, but rather a concentrated questioning of Aave's governance structure and boundaries of power and responsibility. 1. Agreement ≠ Product, but who does the brand belong to? 2. Can the team change the attribution of key revenue without going through DAO? 3. Does DAO have ultimate control over "real-world assets" (brand, front-end, discourse power)? In the current mood, it is interpreted as' founder opposes brand ownership by coin holders' Further breakdown of community trust, emergence of extreme speech and clearance sentiment The potential challenge facing Aave this time may not be short-term negative, but rather a concentrated questioning of Aave's governance structure and boundaries of power and responsibility. Agreement ≠ Product, but who does the brand belong to? Can the team change the attribution of key revenue without going through DAO? Does language have ultimate control? 1