Once the voting results for the Aave brand asset transfer came out, I knew DeFi governance was facing a major problem. 55% directly opposed, 41% simply didn't vote—this is not decentralization and autonomy, it's decentralization paralysis. To put it nicely, claims of community ownership and on-chain governance democratization sound good, but when it comes to action, most people either find it troublesome or fear risks, and finally choose to remain silent.

I took a close look at Falcon_Finance's governance approach, and they’ve already figured out this routine. They don’t implement a one-size-fits-all large vote; instead, they break down the issues into specific, actionable small tasks—first vote on whether to change the logo, then decide who manages the official website, and finally handle the transfer of legal entities. By splitting it up this way, the voting turnout skyrocketed to 87%, because each issue was clear and tangible.

The most impressive part is the incentive design. Falcon_Finance directly links DAO governance and revenue; as long as the approved proposals actually generate profit for the protocol—such as increasing lending rates or platform fees—the system automatically shares a portion of this new income as rewards. Last year, a participant opposed listing high-risk assets, but in the end, it helped the protocol avoid a major loss, and they received 3800 tokens as a reward, worth over ten thousand USD. This kind of tangible benefit is much more reliable than empty slogans.

Someone asked if Aave still has a chance to turn things around. I think Falcon_Finance’s gradual transfer plan is a good idea—start by letting the DAO take over social media accounts as a trial, then after three months if everything’s fine, take over the official website, and finally handle sensitive issues like legal entity transfer. The approval rate for these votes shot up to 92%. Why? Simply put, they’re not asking if you want power, but if you want to make more money. Once governance participation and economic incentives are linked, those who previously stayed silent will naturally come out to vote. After all, no one wants to go against their own profits.

The recent failure of the Aave vote actually reflects a common dilemma in the entire DeFi ecosystem: relying solely on idealism and promises of decentralization is far from enough; real participant incentives are necessary. When incentive mechanisms are well-designed, voting turnout and engagement will naturally increase.