Aave is dealing with growing tension inside its community. A recent proposal has caused strong reactions and sharp price moves. The situation is still unfolding and the outcome remains uncertain.
The proposal focuses on token alignment. Its goal is to move control of key brand assets to the DAO. This includes the project name website domains and social media accounts. At present these assets are linked to Aave Labs which is a core builder of the platform.
Supporters of the proposal believe the DAO should fully control the brand. They argue this protects token holders and keeps governance clean. They also say it aligns long term value with the token rather than a single company.
The debate took a new turn when Aave founder and CEO Stani Kulechov spoke out. He said he would vote no on the proposal. He explained that such a big change should follow a more structured process. In his view a simple yes or no vote is not enough.
His position sparked immediate backlash. Critics saw his public stance as pressure on governance. The issue moved from internal discussion to a broader vote where all token holders could participate.
This move drew more criticism from DAO members. One vocal contributor Marc Zeller accused the CEO of interfering with the governance process. He said the situation could have been avoided and warned of damage to trust.
The timing of the vote also became controversial. The voting period runs during the holiday season and ends on December twenty six. Critics argue this limits participation and weakens fair decision making.
The roots of the conflict go back to claims made earlier this month. Some community members alleged that part of the DAO revenue was directed to Aave Labs. Estimates put this revenue near ten million dollars per year.
For critics this raised serious concerns. The DAO uses revenue to support token buybacks and value programs. Any diversion could hurt token holders and weaken the token model.
Supporters of the CEO see things differently. They argue Aave Labs needs incentives to keep building. They believe allowing limited brand monetization supports long term growth and innovation.
As the debate intensified the market reacted fast. AAVE price fell sharply over the past days. In the last twenty four hours alone the token dropped about ten percent. Since the proposal appeared earlier this month the total decline is close to twenty percent.
Onchain data shows large holders selling. One whale sold nearly thirty eight million dollars worth of AAVE at a loss. This signals rising fear and risk reduction.
Price action reflects uncertainty more than fundamentals. Traders dislike governance conflict because it adds unknown risk. When leadership and community clash markets often react first and ask questions later.
The vote is still ongoing. A resolution is expected by December twenty six. Whether compromise or escalation follows will shape confidence going forward.
For now Aave is at a crossroads. Governance trust brand control and value flow are all in question. How this is resolved will matter not just for price but for the future structure of the protocol.
Until clarity returns volatility is likely to stay high. Patience and close attention are essential as the situation develops.
