BadgerDAO Community Council Vote: Loss of Trust and Confidence in the Leadership of the Primary Technical Service Provider to BadgerDAO

Here is a response from a non-paid person who hasnt held the Badger token in over a year.

I have seen what I believe are valid criticisms levied upon the Association and any other decisionmaker involved in shutting down the Discord server.

The responses from or on behalf of the Association, I believe, have all generally been word salad. When I string them together, I cant make heads or tails of the position or the intended message (besides possible diversionary tactics).

Heck, the Association is not even willing to acknowledge that a problem exists.

A lot of typed words are being spilt, but I haven’t seen any viable resolution besides what Trantor proposed in Discord: Discord

I don’t know how else to solve a problem where there are legitimate and extensive gripes from one camp, while the other camp’s dialogue refuses to even acnowledge that a problem exists…


And in my experience, yes there are.


Trust from Trust Security here.

We have actively engaged with many of the staff members at the Association as part the security audit and consultation services provided for the establishment of eBTC. All work with them has been completed at the highest professional level.

For what it’s worth, I’ve also had IRL & online conversations with key BadgerDAO members and found them to be transparent and trustworthy.

I wish for peaceful resolution of the issue through transparency which is at the core of all successful long-term governance models.


Hello Trust. Welcome to the discussion. See your forum account was created about 10 mins ago. Do you mind me asking who/what compelled you to get engaged here? We are hearing from a lot of new voices for the first time the last couple days.

Similar to my interests in Steakhouses perspective on this

I’d appreciate your thoughts as well.



Hello monetsupply. Its great to have you engaged here. I’ve followed you for a long time and have great respect for the reputation you’ve built in defi.

Would you mind weighing on your experiences relative to this.

It’s exciting to have such experienced voices from outside the Badger DAO getting involved and becoming part of the Sett

1 Like

I’ve been notified of the thread by a member I closely worked with during the security engagement and I offered to share my experience.

With regards to working with outside entities, certainly most DAOs make use of some registered entity to conduct B2B operations, I don’t see anything unusual about the Association.

1 Like

Appreciate the feedback🙏
Do you have a view from your experience with the governance related aspects of DAOs engaging with Associations and Associations engaging
with outside entities on its behalf?


1 Like

Hello, I have not been involved with Badger since being laid off more than a year ago at the start of the bear.

I sold all my tokens at that point because they did not seem to be of any value in governing the protocol with all shots being called by the Toronto group.

That said, my experience with Badger has made me skeptical that a chaotic DAO can ship good products and more centralization is probably good for product direction.

It looks like an impasse has been reached and the DAO is trying to re-assert some level of governance over the insider group. I tend to agree that that ship has probably sailed and a peaceful divorce is best. Why? Because it most closely resembles the current state of the DAO with the insider group running things and the community doing its own thing.

I have always been in favor of a legal entity for Badger but was shocked to learn in these threads that one had been created almost a year ago with no BIP, and that this Association has some kind of executive board that controls it (shouldn’t that be the DAO?).

But if you want so salvage this thing, clearly step one is to:

Create and pass a BIP that legitimizes the Association and delineates its powers.

  • Can it unilaterally turn off the discord?
  • launch / kill products
  • hire / fire / spend / etc
  • what can the council do? What can the Association do? What can the Association Board do?

These choices are all necessary and fine to make if authorized by governance. But without an authorizing BIP then it’s 100% fiction to say that the DAO / token / community have anything more than a figleaf of governance power.


It is truly sad to see words like ‘community’ and ‘DAO’ being weaponized to serve an agenda.

When I started at Badger 3 years ago, this place looked a lot different. Some of the people who are actively engaging in this discourse had yet to find their way into the Badger ecosystem as contributors. Coming off the tail end of DeFi Summer, there was a mix of excitement and chaos as the project worked to find its footing and capitalize on a successful launch. As I am sure we all can relate, building the financial tools to power a financial revolution isn’t easy, especially while attempting to follow a rule book for operating that has yet to be written. Almost like building the plane while it’s taking off - a potentially overused metaphor, I know.

It was a bumpy ride in the beginning. I personally witnessed many people come and go on their own accord for various reasons. DeFi startups are certainly not for the faint of heart. But a peculiar thing happens when the going gets tough and things start to take a turn for the worse. A once-vibrant community has a habit of dissipating, and over time, you start to learn more about people and their motives for being there in the first place. This, of course, leaves room for a growing divide where perception and reality are no longer aligned. Suddenly the battle we were once fighting together is now being waged against one another.

Having spent time in person with a number of the people actively waging this unfortunate campaign against the association, I am both shocked and appalled at the level of misinformation being shared and the disrespectful way in which it is being communicated. Nothing but respect and compassion has been shown to them thus far, and this is a gross overreaction and completely unwarranted. The blatant attempts to bulldoze any and all responses to their criticism is far from productive. As someone who has been present through the toughest of challenges and witnessed the constant evolution and progression towards something better, I can say with unwavering confidence that I do not share the opinions of these outlier council members and do not believe their rhetoric to be an accurate representation of the community and what it stands for.

On to the catalyst for this discussion - Discord.

Since its inception, the BadgerDAO Discord has been overseen by individual community members - not the association. Marketing, communications and support have always been closely intertwined and as such I, as an individual contributor and community member, have been actively involved in upgrading and evolving the infrastructure to provide a more optimal UX and a more efficient support system for users. As of today, there are a total of 5 individuals with admin privileges for the server, including myself and support.

In my experience, Discord was not built for DeFi. As with many things in our shared space, we have not opted to use the right tools across the board. The simple fact that we agreed to share the most complex technical information via a platform that, up until recently, only allowed you to share 280 characters at a time is truly unbelievable. But alas, here we are.

As part of our active and ongoing efforts to upgrade security measures across both tech and operations, service providers across web2, web3, and marketing conducted the first of many Incident Response drills with GreyCastle. The intention was to simulate a number of scenarios that would pressure-test our existing response plan in order to identify potential areas for improvement and strengthen our approach. In doing so, it became clear that the best course of action was to consolidate channels of communication, move support infrastructure to a more reliable and secure platform, and attempt to minimize outstanding security liabilities.

After much due diligence to ensure a proper transition of all relevant services, a transition plan for deprecating the Discord was put in place. To reiterate, the intention behind this was nothing more than to ensure the well-being of our community members and to fortify our security infrastructure based on knowledge gathered from working with trusted partners in this space. To imply otherwise is simply not true.

At the time of this post, the BadgerDAO Discord has 7,888 VERIFIED members. At best, this represents 25% of the total number of $BADGER token holders, assuming each member possesses a wallet with some amount of tokens in it. For comparison, the Badger and eBTC Twitter accounts combined have more than 50,000 followers.

Furthermore, to interact with Badger on Discord, you must create an account, profile, and pass verification, at which point you then need to navigate your way to the correct channel in order to voice your concerns or feedback. In a space where UX is so far from where it needs to be, maintaining this server for the purposes outlined by these outliers is not safe or productive.

Clearly, governance was not hindered, as evident in this post and my ability to respond to it. Both @1500Badger and @FreddyTheFilosopher maintain admin rights here and have the ability to conduct business as usual without issue.

I’ll end on this - I fear this unfortunately has little to do with the deprecation of the Badger chat room and believe this to be a malicious act on behalf of a group of people under the guise of helping token holders and speaking up for the community. To imply the association and the service providers it employs are in any way working against the growth and well-being of this project is a direct attack on our collective future and any success we can hope to see moving forward.

Imagine writing all that and thinking the only issue is the discord.



Nothing but respect and compassion has been shown to them

Who is “them”? The DAO? The Council? The entity that you unilaterally decided to shut off without any notice?

The blatant attempts to bulldoze any and all responses to their criticism is far from productive.

Sorry bro… who shut down the Discord without any notice?

After much due diligence to ensure a proper transition of all relevant services, a transition plan for deprecating the Discord was put in place.

NONE of that was discussed with the Council or even the members of Discord.

Furthermore, to interact with Badger on Discord, you must create an account, profile, and pass verification, at which point you then need to navigate your way to the correct channel in order to voice your concerns or feedback.

So, the exact same process as signing up for this forum software?


Wow, let’s shut off Discord, but clearly it isn’t like you’ve been communicating much here either…

Long time listener, first time caller.

I’ve known members of the Badger founding team for some time now and wanted to chime in. To preempt some questions I see above:

  • new account, created to make this reply as it’s an important one
  • relation with the BA is professional and I consider some of the members friends. Do with that as you will

I met Dapp and Spada online pre Citidel and we talked a lot about the future of Badger (both were excited to share the history and prospects for the future). In addition to Badger topics, they were free and open with technical expertise and advice around a project I was working on at the time (which never fully took off, but I digress). TBH looking back I wish I got involved in Citadel. From a personal perspective, was cool to see team members who cared deeply about their project’s technical considerations as well as long term sustainability and community participation.

We finally met up in person around the time of the cloudflare incident. Was a heavy topic which they seemed to have handled, what was in their power to handle, quite well. I have a dev and security background and it was informative to hear who they brought into the project since to help with everything from web2sec to monitoring through to 3rd party code reviews. They’re now among the people I ask for advice on many of these topics.

Since we first met in person, I’ve attended some of the Badger House events where I got to meet more of the team in person, including some of the security and dev experts who Spada was quick to introduce me to. All that to say, in all of my personal and semi professional interaction with them, they’ve been “all about the community” in both what they say and do.

I’m not intimately involved in governance but hear from reading above there is friction. In my digital and in person travels, I’ve not met anyone who shows they care as much as the individuals involved in the BA. My positive perceptions of Badger are entirely based on my interactions with these individuals.

Moving between personal and professional, I joined Spearbit core and was thrilled to see eBTC work between a project I care about and an org I’m a part of. Spearbit is a US entity and requires KYC of clients, working with an anon dao is a non starter (unfortunately). As I understand it, this is a large part of the reason projects like Badger maintain an Association.

Re the spark that led to this forum thread, I don’t envy anyone responsible for managing a public discord. The scams, spam, and bots that inevitably show up can be a nightmare to manage. There are ways to try, but as many of you know it’s an ongoing arms race between server maintainers and malicious actors. With community caught in the middle :expressionless:

Is turning a server to read only safer? For sure. Was it controversial and contentious? The thread above makes “yes” the obvious answer. I see it’s back on so glad to see that particular fire has been put out.

Where to go from here, I see little value in having less involvement from the likes of Dapp, Spada, and team. As started above, they’re largely responsible for instilling in me trust and positive perceptions around this project.


Bro, everything was just dandy before someone woke up one morning and decided to turn off the main avenue of discussion for the community, without asking anyone first to see if it is was a good idea.

1 Like

The next person who posts here with more than a paragraph of text, praising Spada, and just joined, is going to get laughed out of the room.


I find it interesting a lot of back slapping for Spada from people not in the community and universal condemnation from those who have been here not in the association but as tokenholders.

Anyway, not against an association so that organizations can work with kyc’d folks. The issue is the association has control of DAO tech, is funded from DAO Treasury and was established without DAO approval or oversight capabilities.

I look forward to Spada and team rectifying post haste. I am sure that is their intention. But trust is something we hate in crypto. We’re about trustless systems. So let’s get back on discord and on chain and codify things as they should have been done from the start through RFF and BIPs.


Lol dying. Hahaha :rofl::joy::rofl:



You say governance was not hindered. This is tone deaf to the Council and community who used Discord as it’s primary governance engagement tool.

BIP 93 - Council 2.0:

  • “Community Council has primary responsibility for facilitating Badger governance”
  • “The council will engage with members in the Badger Forum and Discord”
  • "Ensure BIPs have a BIP/RFF channel in the public Discord for community engagement

In practice, Discord:

  • Is the primary place where initial governance discussions occurred first - leading to Discord RFFs and subsequently posting to the Forum
  • It is the place where all Council votes to proceed to a BIP and post on the forum have been publicly taken
  • It’s where discussions and Council decisions can be seen for posterity
  • It’s where decisions to move from the Forum to a snapshot have been taken
  • It’s where the record of all Council Emissions decisions are made and recorded for posterity

You also say, " a transition plan for deprecating the Discord was put in place.":

  • Please share said plan
  • Explain why the plan included no community notice or discussion, even with the community elected governance bodies
  • Explain the sense of urgency and why the plan was executed on a Friday, mid-day, with a complete shut-down and blocking of all functionality
  • Describe why the sense of urgency to delete the channel in 72 hours, right after the weekend was over

In reality, there was no sense of urgency. The Association had this planned for a while. Spada reduced council member forum permissions weeks ago. Support technology was embedded into the website and announced well in advance.

To you, and all the other paid server providers who engaged in governance discussions here for the first time, please note that, in the vote of no confidence, the Council went out of its way to state “the team has strong technical experts building smart contracts that are respected by the broader defi community”.

The vote of no confidence was in the leadership of the association who demonstrated a callous disregard for decentralization and community led governance - culminating in a decision interfering with governance. The decision was either done with incompetence or malice. Either reinforces the vote of a loss of trust and confidence in the Association leadership.

Further, you are not the first person to cast the no confidence vote as a ‘governance’ attack - it was the call to arms used by Spada to get engagement on this Forum by those paid by the Association. And guys, I’m sure it’s a fun and rewarding job.

The resolution was a vote of no confidence in leadership commitment to decentralization and an acknowledgement that, after 3 years of good ideas and fun work - Badger has zero products in the market and has not shared a roadmap to profitability with the community.

There has been no community led governance attack - simply a call to remove conflicts of interest and ensure accountability of the Swiss Association to token holders.


I think you just outed two of the leaders of the Swiss Association. The rumor has it there are 3…

I don’t think Swiss Association leadership has ever been publicly announced.

You see what I’m getting at here, right? I’m not implying a conspiracy - simply a lack of transparency and an resistance to decentralization.

Nobody, even now, knows who made the decision to shutter Discord or how that decision was made.