Marc Zeller’s Aave Chan Initiative to Depart Aave Amidst Governance Challenges
Key Takeaways:
- Aave Chan Initiative (ACI) decides not to renew its involvement with Aave DAO amid intensifying governance disputes.
- The departure of ACI marks the second significant contributor exit from Aave, following BGD Labs’ decision to cease contributions.
- A governance dispute triggered in December 2025 highlights issues of control, accountability, and fund allocation within Aave.
- ACI intends to terminate its GHO stablecoin funding arrangement early, seeking a lump sum payout as it prepares for a structured exit.
WEEX Crypto News, 2026-03-03 18:26:01
Introduction
In a notable shakeup within the decentralized finance sector, the Aave Chan Initiative, a prominent delegate and service provider within the Aave DAO ecosystem, has announced its decision to step away. The departure signals growing unrest and governance challenges within Aave’s evolving landscape, following the exit of another key contributor, BGD Labs, just weeks earlier. The move comes amidst ongoing debates over governance transparency, control, and the distribution of funds—issues that have been simmering within the Aave community.
ACI’s Planned Departure
The Aave Chan Initiative, spearheaded by Marc Zeller, has emphasized its intention to withdraw from its commitments to the Aave DAO by July 2026. Aware of the implications of this exit, Zeller has outlined a four-month wind-down plan to ensure a smooth transition. This involves maintaining governance roles to execute remaining commitments and ensuring an orderly handover of responsibilities and infrastructure.
This announcement follows a closely related development involving BGD Labs, a core technical contributor to Aave. As a foundational member of the protocol, BGD Labs revealed its plans to end contributions by April due to disagreements over strategic direction and governance practices. This decision has sent ripples through the community, highlighting underlying concerns about governance tensions within Aave.
Exploring the Governance Dispute
Central to Aave’s current governance upheaval are issues of transparency and decision-making control within the DAO. The dispute dates back to December 2025 when EzR3aL, a community member, raised concerns over fee allocations from the CoW Swap integration. Instead of funds accruing to the DAO treasury, fees were redirected to Aave Labs without prior governance approval or announcement. This action ignited debates regarding accountability and the diversion of revenues away from token holders.
In response to these concerns, BGD Labs proposed transferring crucial Aave brand assets—domains, trademarks, and social media accounts—under DAO control. However, efforts to cement this change through a Snapshot vote hit a roadblock amidst abstentions and against a backdrop of opposition from key figures, including Aave’s founder Stani Kulechov.
The Proposal for Revenue Reallocation
As tensions simmered, Kulechov advanced a proposal titled “How AAVE will win” that sought to reorient revenue streams toward the DAO. This plan suggested redirecting all revenue from Aave-branded ventures, encompassing products like frontend apps, swaps, Aave Pro, and the Aave Card, into the DAO’s treasury. The aim was to secure $51 million in funding, with allocations comprising stablecoins and 75,000 AAVE tokens earmarked for Aave v4 development.
Zeller subsequently scrutinized Aave Labs, presenting an accountability analysis highlighting historical funding estimates of approximately $86 million. He pressed for greater transparency and questioned the return on investment achieved through these funds.
Challenges in Governing Autonomy
The resultant conversations on governance underscored the prevailing issues of control within Aave. The successful passage of the “How AAVE will win” proposal with 52.58% support raised questions over voting power dynamics. Zeller argued that voting influence significantly tied to Aave Labs skewed the results. By excluding roughly 233,000 AAVE, identified as Labs-linked, the outcome would have shifted towards 497,100 NAY against approximately 387,000 YAE—suggesting ongoing centralization concerns.
The existing governance protocol thus faces criticism for not being sufficiently decentralized to honor existing commitments. Zeller pointed to this governance stasis as a prime reason for ACI’s withdrawal from the Aave ecosystem despite a desire for professional execution of their exit strategy.
Next Steps for ACI
As ACI initiates its withdrawal, focus shifts to its GHO stablecoin funding stream. A proposal submitted by ACI suggests converting the stream into a lump sum payment to facilitate an orderly transition. This seeks to mitigate dependence on a governance process dominated by a single entity with sufficient voting power to cancel active streams.
In case the DAO declines this proposal, ACI warns it would interpret this as an indication that Aave has no intention of honoring commitments, prompting an immediate cessation of activities and contract obligations. This aspect of the transition remains pivotal in shaping the future interactions between ACI and Aave.
Conclusion
The impending withdrawal of the Aave Chan Initiative from the Aave ecosystem marks a critical juncture within the platform’s governance evolution. It highlights ongoing challenges in maintaining transparency, decentralization, and accountability—ideals foundational to the ethos of decentralized finance. As Zeller bids farewell to Aave, best wishes accompany other remaining service providers, including Chaos Labs, TokenLogic, LlamaRisk, and Certora, as they continue contributing to the protocol’s success.
FAQ
What is the primary reason behind ACI’s departure from Aave?
ACI’s decision to leave Aave primarily stems from growing governance tensions, particularly disputes concerning transparency, control, and fund allocation.
How does ACI plan to transition its responsibilities upon leaving Aave?
ACI has laid out a four-month wind-down plan focused on governance activities, fulfilling outstanding commitments, and ensuring an orderly infrastructure transition to mitigate disruptions.
What was the catalyst for the governance dispute at Aave?
The dispute was catalyzed by concerns over revenue allocations from the CoW Swap integration being routed to Aave Labs without governance approval, sparking broader debates on control and accountability.
What was proposed in the “How AAVE will win” framework?
The proposal sought to redirect 100% of revenue from Aave-branded products to the DAO treasury in exchange for $51 million in funding to support the ongoing development of Aave v4, currently in testnet phase.
How does the governance dispute affect Aave’s future?
The dispute emphasizes the need for more decentralized governance and transparent processes within Aave, which are essential for fostering a robust and sustainable platform moving forward.
You may also like

Prediction Markets Under Bias

Stolen: $290 million, Three Parties Refusing to Acknowledge, Who Should Foot the Bill for the KelpDAO Incident Resolution?

ASTEROID Pumped 10,000x in Three Days, Is Meme Season Back on Ethereum?

ChainCatcher Hong Kong Themed Forum Highlights: Decoding the Growth Engine Under the Integration of Crypto Assets and Smart Economy

Why can this institution still grow by 150% when the scale of leading crypto VCs has shrunk significantly?

Anthropic's $1 trillion, compared to DeepSeek's $100 billion

Geopolitical Risk Persists, Is Bitcoin Becoming a Key Barometer?

Annualized 11.5%, Wall Street Buzzing: Is MicroStrategy's STRC Bitcoin's Savior or Destroyer?

An Obscure Open Source AI Tool Alerted on Kelp DAO's $292 million Bug 12 Days Ago

Mixin has launched USTD-margined perpetual contracts, bringing derivative trading into the chat scene.
The privacy-focused crypto wallet Mixin announced today the launch of its U-based perpetual contract (a derivative priced in USDT). Unlike traditional exchanges, Mixin has taken a new approach by "liberating" derivative trading from isolated matching engines and embedding it into the instant messaging environment.
Users can directly open positions within the app with leverage of up to 200x, while sharing positions, discussing strategies, and copy trading within private communities. Trading, social interaction, and asset management are integrated into the same interface.
Based on its non-custodial architecture, Mixin has eliminated friction from the traditional onboarding process, allowing users to participate in perpetual contract trading without identity verification.
The trading process has been streamlined into five steps:
· Choose the trading asset
· Select long or short
· Input position size and leverage
· Confirm order details
· Confirm and open the position
The interface provides real-time visualization of price, position, and profit and loss (PnL), allowing users to complete trades without switching between multiple modules.
Mixin has directly integrated social features into the derivative trading environment. Users can create private trading communities and interact around real-time positions:
· End-to-end encrypted private groups supporting up to 1024 members
· End-to-end encrypted voice communication
· One-click position sharing
· One-click trade copying
On the execution side, Mixin aggregates liquidity from multiple sources and accesses decentralized protocol and external market liquidity through a unified trading interface.
By combining social interaction with trade execution, Mixin enables users to collaborate, share, and execute trading strategies instantly within the same environment.
Mixin has also introduced a referral incentive system based on trading behavior:
· Users can join with an invite code
· Up to 60% of trading fees as referral rewards
· Incentive mechanism designed for long-term, sustainable earnings
This model aims to drive user-driven network expansion and organic growth.
Mixin's derivative transactions are built on top of its existing self-custody wallet infrastructure, with core features including:
· Separation of transaction account and asset storage
· User full control over assets
· Platform does not custody user funds
· Built-in privacy mechanisms to reduce data exposure
The system aims to strike a balance between transaction efficiency, asset security, and privacy protection.
Against the background of perpetual contracts becoming a mainstream trading tool, Mixin is exploring a different development direction by lowering barriers, enhancing social and privacy attributes.
The platform does not only view transactions as execution actions but positions them as a networked activity: transactions have social attributes, strategies can be shared, and relationships between individuals also become part of the financial system.
Mixin's design is based on a user-initiated, user-controlled model. The platform neither custodies assets nor executes transactions on behalf of users.
This model aligns with a statement issued by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on April 13, 2026, titled "Staff Statement on Whether Partial User Interface Used in Preparing Cryptocurrency Securities Transactions May Require Broker-Dealer Registration."
The statement indicates that, under the premise where transactions are entirely initiated and controlled by users, non-custodial service providers that offer neutral interfaces may not need to register as broker-dealers or exchanges.
Mixin is a decentralized, self-custodial privacy wallet designed to provide secure and efficient digital asset management services.
Its core capabilities include:
· Aggregation: integrating multi-chain assets and routing between different transaction paths to simplify user operations
· High liquidity access: connecting to various liquidity sources, including decentralized protocols and external markets
· Decentralization: achieving full user control over assets without relying on custodial intermediaries
· Privacy protection: safeguarding assets and data through MPC, CryptoNote, and end-to-end encrypted communication
Mixin has been in operation for over 8 years, supporting over 40 blockchains and more than 10,000 assets, with a global user base exceeding 10 million and an on-chain self-custodied asset scale of over $1 billion.

$600 million stolen in 20 days, ushering in the era of AI hackers in the crypto world

Vitalik's 2026 Hong Kong Web3 Summit Speech: Ethereum's Ultimate Vision as the "World Computer" and Future Roadmap

On the same day Aave introduced rsETH, why did Spark decide to exit?

Full Post-Mortem of the KelpDAO Incident: Why Did Aave, Which Was Not Compromised, End Up in Crisis Situation?

After a $290 million DeFi liquidation, is the security promise still there?

ZachXBT's post ignites RAVE nearing zero, what is the truth behind the insider control?

Vitalik 2026 Hong Kong Web3 Carnival Speech Transcript: We do not compete on speed; security and decentralization are the core


