bcvfinance.eth

@A_Leutenegger @BlockEnthusiast @banteg There is no such thing as a pure DAO. These are basically a new generation of public companies.

@BlockEnthusiast @banteg Depends how you define DAO. But yes, totally agreed. Autonomy means that no external party can impact it in such a way.

arbitrum dao got a "restraining order" from unrelated victims of north korea. the dao would be completely in the right to ignore it, given these funds have a clear provenance to kelp/layerzero hack victims, and belong to them. i urge aave or any other parties making proposals to skip any intermediate multisigs and move funds to the recovery contracts directly. this would allow to skip any possible meatspace pressure altogether.

@ConorSvensson ENS still has not secured a long-term competitive edge. Any naming protocol that gets adopted by CEXs will probably take the throne.

It's fine if people want to create alternative naming services, but I don't believe it's the best use of their time. It's like creating alt-L1s. You can do it, but if your motivations aren't truly alturistic, you're probably wasting your time. Ethereum and ENS work just fine.

The dashboards are useful, but they are not enough as the main financial transparency layer. I would still expect more frequent financial reporting from Labs, ideally monthly or at least quarterly. Annual reporting alone is not sufficient for tokenholders to properly monitor fiscal discipline, actual-vs-budget performance, and expense classifications throughout the year.

@lex_node Definitely. self-custody asks too much of the average user.

users who want reversibility against hacks will realize their preferences are even better served by embracing an even stronger version of it (get fraud protection/insurance for everything like paypal)...hence arbitrum/other < stage 2 rollups will ultimately either have to be like paypal or go stage 2...

@jalilwahdat 🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️

5min reproduction details from the disclosure gist: gist.github.com/jwahdatehagh/0… this is an insane mistake to make for a library that was supposed to fix internet authentication.

public disclosure time... for 3+ years, the original SIWE Discourse plugin let anyone sign in as anyone else. how? identity was taken fro a client-controlled form field rather than from the actual cryptographic signature. hard to believe no one found it for such a long time, we only did while building the new version last month. this, and more, is fixed in the latest release. ecosystem forums like @ensdomains have already migrated to the new version. full details: discuss.ens.domains/t/siwe-discour…

@deacix @1inch @aave Lending is not risk-free. This is a good reminder of that, even when the asset is ETH.

For anyone stuck as a WETH supplier on @aave: the secondary market works. 1,000 aEthWETH → 980.38 WETH via @1inch. ~2% discount. Not a great exit, but an exit. The discount is what the market thinks the haircut will be. 1inch.com/swap

@LidoFinance Getting into the lending business was never a good idea, as I’ve said many times on the forum.

[Lido Earn Disclosure] The Lido Earn team is aware of the developing situation with the Kelp DAO exploit. earnETH has exposure to rsETH. As a precaution, further deposits into earnETH have been paused while the situation is assessed alongside relevant partners. We will share further updates as more details become available.

What a strong comment on Lido DAO’s financial status by @Stefa2kEth : research.lido.fi/t/goose-2025-e… If even one of the biggest DAOs still cannot provide public-company level financial legibility and fiscal discipline, that should make the whole industry think. The hope with DAOs was that revenue-generating organizations could remain sustainable under public ownership. But across the industry, we have too often ended up with DAOs showing weak financial discipline, poor transparency, and limited accountability. DAOs still seem far from proving they can replace the standards imposed by regulators, disclosure rules, and corporate law. Every month, I lose a bit more confidence in the idea of a sustainable public company model without regulators. I increasingly doubt that a durable DAO standard can be established with the current investor base. My instinct and experience tell me that many first-generation DAOs may end in structural failure, and that only after that will a second generation emerge, one built around a more educated owner base that actively participates in governance, enforces oversight and transparency, and allocates capital more responsibly.

Great visualization and wallet labeling. But I think DAO holdings should be excluded for DAO tokens, since they should not be counted as holders and they reduce the clarity of the data. For example, here's the ENS holder chart. You could also put exchange wallets in a separate category for a clearer view of actual holders.

We also made minor improvements to the token holder chart, with more updates coming soon This is currently in Beta and we’re still improving it. In the meantime, let us know if you run into any issues or have feedback 🙏

🆕 Token Holders Overview (Beta) Get a clear read on holder concentration, tier distribution, and Gini score at a glance Available on the ERC-20 Holders tab for tokens with Neutral or OK reputation

@CryptoIgzeee I do not think Labs would sacrifice growth for a short-term revenue increase, but let’s see.

I read through the temp check, and honestly it feels like a reaction to declining revenue rather than a forward-looking strategy. When renewals and activity slow down, the instinct is to increase prices or push multi-year lock-ins to stabilize income. But that doesn’t address why people are leaving in the first place. The bigger issue is that ENS feels increasingly disconnected from its core users. Less engagement → fewer renewals → lower revenue. Raising prices in that environment just risks accelerating the cycle. The multi-year discounts look attractive on paper, but in reality they’re just incentivizing people to lock capital longer to offset a higher base price. That’s not growth, that’s revenue smoothing. If anything, this kind of move can end up being the tipping point. When a product is already losing momentum, making it more expensive to stay rarely brings people back—it just pushes more out.

@A_Leutenegger As an investor, I would want to see the founders’ initial allocation below 35%.

@A_Leutenegger In most protocol tokens, founders have initial allocations close to 50%, which makes them highly prone to governance capture and makes token ownership largely useless.

These are all great but it’s critical you as a token holder OWN or CONTROL the rights to have these, onchain programmatically or legally. Otherwise it’s all hopes and prayers.

@lovvrEth @ensviewxyz Yes, that is exactly what ENS DAO and the main funding recipients should be blamed for. An entity funded with $10M a year should focus more on these matters than on creating experimental Layer 2 chains.

@ensviewxyz You're blaming ens because you're exchange doesn't use it? weird

They’ve been talking about “building” for years and collecting plenty in renewal fees, yet major exchanges still don’t support ENS for ETH withdrawals. So what exactly have they built?

@DefiIgnas @hasufl delegation rewards cannot depend on requirements set by a single group. The industry still has a long way to go.

@hasufl Things got worse when multiple DAOs REQUIRED forum participation to get delegation rewards. So even when you have not much to add, you have to write something.

Governance forums were always a mistake. I think I've read <10 useful posts from so called "community members", and I've read a lot. But now in the age of AI agents, the cost of producing governance slop has gone to zero, and the supply of spam has exploded. I think I'd like to see someone (maybe @LidoFinance ) experiment with permissioned forums. Everyone can read, but only a curated set of human contributors, customers, community members etc. can write. Everyone knows that the key to a good group chat is keeping it small, and tighting controlling who gets in. The product is the curation. Letting spammers post freely is a guaranteed way to kill any debate before it can even start.

@SnapshotLabs Onchain governance has many use cases that can be applied in the real world.

Funny how people are so quick to dismiss DAOs - both in practice and as an idea - because five years of experimentation haven't yielded results that are up to par with the corporate form - something that has been iterated on since the early 17th century. DAOs do have their shortcomings - but they're still in their nascency. Companies as software - with users, contributors, and owners that are agent and human alike - is a real vision. And one we believe unlocks what DAOs were always meant to be. We're working on something that might just be one of the biggest missing pieces in making this real. What if automated proposal execution went beyond blockchains...

@CryptoIgzeee Sadly, the problem is that more than 90% of the tokens do not participate in governance. So the protocol’s revenue is fully in the hands of Labs, and they spend more and more every year.

You can already see it with their Layer 2 project, years of spending, and it took a single tweet from Vitalik to make them realize. It feels like ENS Dao is focused on continuing to build just to stay busy, rather than stepping back and asking whether what they’re building actually makes sense for the ENS ecosystem and drives real mass adoption.

This isn’t FUD, it’s about priorities. ENS DAO should be doubling down on .eth adoption, not allocating significant resources toward extending ENS features to DNS. If that same time, funding, and focus went into: - educating everyday users - building simple, real-world use cases - supporting integrations that actually drive usage we’d be in a very different position today. Right now it still feels like ENS is being built for crypto natives, not for normal people. A simple example: PayPal could integrate ENS in a meaningful way, not just technically, but commercially: let users buy ENS names directly inside PayPal - market ENS as a way to send money cheaper and globally - show real savings vs traditional remittance systems - And not just for individuals, businesses and merchants are a huge missed opportunity. give merchants simple .eth payment identities - allow businesses to receive crypto without dealing with complex wallet UX - position ENS as a global payment username for commerce Even something simple like: - first-year free or discounted ENS names for businesses - bundled onboarding (wallet + ENS + basic payment flow) - co-marketing campaigns with early adopters could accelerate real-world adoption significantly. ENS doesn’t need to chase DNS. It needs to win as a new system for identity and payments for both people and businesses.

KYC is so redundant in a world of enormous data leaks and AI we need to abolish KYC and replace it with either cryptographic proofs or game theory DeFi is ahead of the curve on this one dont let the institutions say otherwise