A controversial governance vote at the decentralized finance (DeFi) platform Aave has come under fire from significant community members after a proposal regarding the control of Aave’s brand assets was hurriedly placed into a Snapshot vote. This decision was made amidst a lack of consensus and ongoing discussions.

The proposal asks whether Aave (AAVE) token holders should regain authority over the protocol’s brand assets, including domains, social media handles, naming rights, and other intellectual properties via a DAO-controlled legal mechanism.

Aave’s founder, Stani Kulechov, stated that there was a keen interest in making a decision, confirming that the proposal had progressed to a voting stage. “We realize the community is very interested in a path forward and is ready to make a decision,” Kulechov mentioned.

However, some community participants expressed that the proposal was escalated in a hasty manner, complaining it sidestepped the expected governance protocols.

“This is not, in ethos, my proposal,” Boado noted on X, referring to the escalation having occurred without his approval or awareness. He remarked that it contravened the foundation of trust within the community.

Marc Zeller, who heads the Aave Chan Initiative (ACI), expressed that the initiative’s proposal was “unilaterally escalated” despite lingering uncertainties from delegates and token holders. In a public statement, he lamented that the decisions and timing adversely affected community engagement and recognized limitations on the ability of late-informed stakeholders.

“What started as a push for clarity and a more fair relationship between token holders and the current stewards,” Zeller explained, “is now turning into a hostile takeover attempt by Labs.”

Zeller also condemned the timing of the vote, as it fell during a holiday period that stakeholders traditionally identify as one of the least favorable for critical governance decisions.

In defense against these remarks, Kulechov asserted that the discussion had been ongoing for five days and involved many comments, contending that the vote adhered to all procedural obligations. “People are tired of this discussion and getting into a vote is the best way to resolve,” he remarked.

The contention brings to light deeper governance issues concerning Aave, as it stands as one of the top DeFi protocols in the market. Although the proposal centers on ownership of “soft” assets, the backlash reveals how influential aspects of control regarding escalation, timing, and the flow of information can be.