The largest DAO platform in history, Aragon, disbands its committee, providing governance insights for all practitioners
The community enumerates the "six sins" of the Aragon Association committee's past governance. Where should the remaining funds be allocated?Author: Rhythm Worker, BlockBeats
On November 3, some media reported that the DAO management platform Aragon and Aragon DAO had been dissolved. However, according to BlockBeats, it was found that Aragon actually made significant updates, and what was dissolved was the Aragon Association committee responsible for managing the funds raised in the network token sale. Aragon will continue to focus on its product-centric mission in the future.
Aragon is Decentralizing
The Aragon Association committee can be seen as the legal steward of the Aragon project, responsible for managing the funds raised in the Aragon network token sale. According to the official website, Aragon's founders Luis Cuende and Jorge Izquierdo serve as co-founders and executive directors of the Aragon Association committee.
Aragon is a decentralized governance solution for Web3 communities and organizations, founded by Luis Cuende and Jorge Izquierdo in 2016. It aims to enable organizations, entrepreneurs, and investors to conduct business without legal relationships. Aragon's open-source stack supports the deployment of DAOs, community management, dispute resolution, and enterprise-level voting, all without intermediaries, with a mission to create better on-chain, borderless, and transparent organizations.
Aragon has made significant contributions to the industry development of DAOs and can be considered the largest DAO platform in history. For example, it developed aragonOS—a DAO framework that experiments with governance at software speed. Today, aragonOS supports Ethereum-based DAOs like Lido and Curve, helping these projects manage over $16 billion in assets. The Aragon App developed by Aragon is a user interface that allows anyone to deploy and manage DAOs without coding.
The reason for the significant update is explained in Aragon's official announcement: "While the financial department has grown significantly, the complexity of bureaucracy, inconsistencies among stakeholders, and failed attempts to modify governance have increased tensions within the project. It has proven that both AA and ANT are currently unsuitable for managing the project. Aragon needs to restart; there is nothing else to do but reset."
The Community Lists the "Seven Sins" of the Aragon Association
Aragon community member @Samsara79416227 stated that over the past year, the Aragon Association (AA) has continued to disappoint all DAO members, its community, and regulators. In the past six months, many actions taken by AA have directly contradicted its responsibilities.
Samsara listed the "seven sins" of the Aragon Association:
Ignoring Votes: The vote to transfer the treasury to AN DAO has been passed for 8 months, but the Aragon Association refuses to transfer any funds. Why do they ignore the will of ANT holders?
Lack of Transparency: Multiple unanswered forum posts have inquired about the treasury. The Aragon Association unilaterally decided to merge the treasury without discussion on timing/balance.
Missed Timelines: They claimed to have a solution in 4 months, but there has been no progress each month. Now it is October 27, and there are no signs of a solution. Why the constant delays?
Negligence of the Aragon Association has frustrated its own team members—the team had to create a separate Discord channel to ask the Aragon Association questions because they lacked information/transparency. Even simple transactions took weeks.
Lies from the Executive Director of the Aragon Association: He claimed his contract was not withheld, but this is a blatant lie. Why would Aragon Association members misreport their positions?
Malice exhibited by the Aragon Association, lacking caution in answering questions, lying, and failing to focus on voting, etc. This mockery of the DAO cannot continue.
The Biggest Debate: Where Should the Remaining Funds Go?
Aragon stated in its official announcement that the remaining funds will be used for product development. At the same time, the Aragon Association has deployed 86,343 ETH to a redemption contract on the Ethereum mainnet, allowing ANT holders to exchange ANT for ETH at a fixed rate of 0.0025376 ETH/ANT.
Regarding this decision, Aragon stated that due to legal restrictions, particularly regulatory risks arising from token speculation and market manipulation, this decision could not be submitted to a public vote.
Crypto researcher DCF GOD strongly disagrees with Aragon's actions, pointing out that the team will claim 100% of the unclaimed funds for themselves. If holders do not see this announcement and claim within a year, they will never get that money back, as the team will take it. DCF GOD listed some feasible solutions for Aragon:
A) Dead supply will receive some new tokens so they can own anything built with their money;
B) All treasuries are claimable forever, so when these holders discover it, they can claim;
C) If the Dead supply is never claimed (still in migration), it should be burned to increase the claim value for everyone;
D) All Dead supply belongs to each person claiming again (this is what traditionally happens, but we have smart contracts that can be fairer to latecomers);
DCF GOD cannot understand why Aragon chose option E, donating it to the team for future product use.
Governance Issues of the Aragon Association in the Past
According to BlockBeats, on May 17, the Aragon Association committee stated that "investors like Arca initiated a 51% attack." In response, Arca's Chief Investment Officer Jeff Dorman stated in a recent blog post, "The narrative of a 51% attack is actually incorrect; we are token holders who want to use our tokens to participate in governance. Arca's staked tokens have encouraged active participation from token holders."
Additionally, in response to the Aragon Association's claim that "gangs" like Arca have harmed many DAOs and their communities, Arca stated that it did not attempt to dissolve Aragon, and that Arca did not invest in Invictus, Rook, Rome, or Temple, where the Fei Labs team proposed dissolution themselves, and the Rook team initially proposed splitting the "Incubator DAO," all of which were efforts by token holders to achieve the best outcomes. BlockBeats previously reported that the Aragon Association committee announced the abolition of all voting rights for ANT holders, and Arca publicly called for Aragon to repurchase ANT.
Regarding the governance issues of the Aragon Association committee, a former executive director of the Aragon Association expressed direct responsibility at the time: "Aragon made many mistakes, and during my leadership of the project (until the end of 2020), I feel that I bear direct responsibility for many of those mistakes. Unfortunately, the complete vision has not yet been realized. However, I believe there is a line when it comes to fabricating alternative versions of the past and our intentions."
Moreover, BlockBeats reported that on August 11, CoinDesk cited a 24-page investigative report written by crypto trading firm Patagon Management LLC, which stated that the Aragon Association considered "selling the project" to an undisclosed bidder at an unknown price in June. This report also accused Aragon of wasting its various crypto assets worth $180 million and questioned whether the organization complied with Swiss nonprofit laws. Aragon stated that it would release a transparency report this month in response to these allegations. In May of this year, due to concerns about the influence of activist investors, Aragon canceled plans to hand over control of its treasury to token holders.
Looking back to 2021, the impactful Aragon "mass resignation" incident, where 13 people left in 5 days, is indeed lamentable.
Although the concept of DAOs aims to allow organizations to be entirely controlled by code, in reality, many DAOs still have excessive human involvement and decision-making, and this excessive human participation is the essence of the trust crisis faced by DAOs.
The concept of DAOs is to automate certain governance processes so that they can continue to operate without human intervention. In Ethereum's white paper, a true DAO should be a decentralized autonomous organization that does not rely on human coordination at all. Even Bitcoin has only partially realized this concept, coming closer to the definition of a DAO but not fully meeting it. Strictly speaking, although many organizations call themselves DAOs, they have not yet achieved true autonomy and independence. DAOs need not only decentralization but also depersonalization.
Meanwhile, after all these years, DAOs are still pondering this question: Should major decisions in blockchain projects be made by a few individuals, or should they adhere to community autonomy and smart contract execution?
