Compound Finance faces controversy over a possible governance attack related to proposals for a new wrapped COMP token, highlighting governance challenges in decentralized finance （DeFi）.
Points
- Governance Controversy: Allegations of a possible governance attack.
- Proposal Details: Creation of a wrapped COMP token called GoldCOMP.
- Community Concerns: Fears of undue control by the Golden Boys group.
Compound Finance, a leading decentralized lending and borrowing protocol, is embroiled in controversy over a potential governance attack. The dispute centers around proposals for a new wrapped COMP token, GoldCOMP, which have sparked significant debate within the community.
Governance Issues and Proposal Details
The controversy began with discussions on Compound’s governance forums, where insiders had warned of potential governance issues days before the proposal’s approval. Proposal 247, titled “Treasury to Invest 5% of COMP holdings into GoldCOMP Vault,” was initially rejected due to insufficient votes. The proposal aimed to create a wrapped COMP token called GoldCOMP, managed by the Golden Boys and funded by COMP.
Community Concerns and Reactions
Despite the initial rejection, an updated version of the proposal, number 279, also failed to pass during a July 19 vote. This iteration sought a one-year investment of 92,000 COMP into the GoldCOMP Treasury Fund. Community members, including the Wintermute Governance bloc, voiced concerns that the proposal would grant the Golden Boys undue control over the funds. They highlighted that withdrawal actions from the vault would be exclusively controlled by the GoldenBoyzMultisig, effectively delegating governance rights to the Golden Boys.
Escalation and Proposal 289
The controversy escalated on July 28 when proposal 289, introduced by the Golden Boys, narrowly passed with 682,191 votes in favor and 633,636 against. This proposal increased the amount of COMP requested for the GoldCOMP treasury from 92,000 to 499,000, a significant rise. The approval means its implementation is slated for July 30.
Precautionary Measures
In response, proposal 290 was introduced, suggesting the transfer of the Compound Governance Timelock Admin to “CommunityMultiSig” to prevent similar proposals from being passed in the future. Critics argue that this precautionary measure may be too little, too late, as the 499,000 COMP requested in proposal 289 is expected to be transferred soon.
Conclusion
The Compound Finance governance controversy highlights significant challenges in decentralized governance within the DeFi space. As the community grapples with the potential implications of the GoldCOMP proposals, the need for robust governance frameworks becomes increasingly evident to maintain trust and transparency.
解説
- Governance Challenges: Highlight the need for robust frameworks in DeFi.
- Community Reactions: Concerns over undue control and governance attacks.
- Precautionary Measures: Proposal to transfer governance timelock admin to prevent future issues.