According to Dr. Michael Egorov, founder of decentralized finance (DeFi) platform Curve Finance, disagreements in a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) are a sign of a robust DAO.
A DAO is a decentralized organizational structure that relies on clever contracts to automate functions and member voting to manage onchain protocols.
Egorov said both the 2024 governance proposal involving the Curve DAO and the recent dispute involving the Aave DAO illustrate the importance of disagreements to the viability of the structure. He told Cointelegraph:
“If everyone automatically agrees on something, people just don’t seem to care. They vote for whatever comes along, or they don’t participate at all. The first sign of this would be apathy in management, such as when people don’t vote at all.”
This earlier Curve DAO case dealt with governance for 2024 application providing Swiss Stake AG, the lead developer of the Curve Finance protocol, with a grant then worth approximately $6.3 million, which was met with significant opposition from Curve DAO members.
Egorov noted that the proposal was revised and resubmitted in December 2025, as well as redrafted application received over 80% attendance from DAO members.
Some analysis last year, blockchain development company LamprosTech stated that “attendance in most DAOs rarely exceeds 15%, concentrating decision-making power in the hands of a small, active group.”
Curve token holders lock up their tokens for a long period of time, which encourages long-term management involvement, Egorov said.
Yegorov said DAOs represent a novel model of human organization, distinct from a company or a sovereign country, but containing elements of a sovereign country, including political parties expressing dissent over how the protocol is governed.
Related: A Lead Technical Contributor who ceases working with Aave DAO
The Aave dispute highlights challenges in onchain governance and intellectual property rights
In December 2025, a management dispute broke out between Aave Labs, Aave’s primary product development company, and Aave DAO over integration fees with DeFi exchange aggregator CoW Swap.
DAO members were critical integration fees go directly to a wallet controlled by Aave Labs, and the refusal has sparked a debate about which entity legally controls the intellectual property on the DeFi platform.
Subsequently, a proposal was submitted to the Aave DAO to transfer the Aave brand assets and intellectual property to the control of the DAO; in the end it didn’t go through.
Legal recognition of DAOs could alleviate governance disputes
DAOs cannot interact with the real world without regulated legal structures such as business entities or bank accounts, and DAO control over intellectual property is a common governance issue, Egorov he said.
DAOs are great for managing anything on-chain, he said, adding that users should also experiment with DAOs for off-chain items as well, although centralized companies may be better suited for managing off-chain structures.
If DAOs could be legally recognized and interact with the classic financial world by having business entities and bank accounts, it could ease governance disputes, Egorov said, adding that the legal system has yet to catch up with the latest technology.
Warehouse: Real Operate Cases for Artificial Intelligence in Cryptography #2: AI Can Run DAOs
