Clarity on Aragon Finances over the years

Hey Antmaxi, Let’s please not accuse the guilds working here of siphoning money or something silly. The Grant Program proposal was literally a KR for this quarter. The quarter ends in a week and thus the proposal has gone up. Just vote no if you disapprove.

1 Like

Disclaimer: I’m not related to AntHolder, or to any other member of the forum.

Regardless, people advocating for austerity and results over goodwill are doing much more for the project than the yes-men who accept every additional funding.

Furthermore, please stop this insane witch hunt around “numbers go up”, when the “guilds” budget has increased from 3.5M to 12M in two years, voted as such by the team members who held more than 51% of the votes. And if you think that voting tokens are a bad way to govern, then please say it clearly.

well this is another interesting response innit?

I wonder why every forum post ends the same? You ignore all relevant issues/requests/questions.

You refuse to answer 90% of the questions on the AA and focus on a proposal to take the full 300k away from the DAO? btw the DAO should have the full amount of funds by now as the vote and the graphics that the team themselves put forward. (isnt this your sole duty in the AA?)

I want transparency.
I want funds to have a purpose -not just get funded since a few team members want more money

So so sorry that triggers you? I find this quite absurd.

If you cannot handle that some people in the DAO cant have differing opinions on the use of funds then quite frankly you are in the wrong field.

I am a ANT holder - I am a DAO member. And i expect to be treated with the same respect as such.

I find it comical you speak in absolutes about my intentions. when its clear.

Stop spending money where it does not need to be spent. I will be continuing that stance

This is completely false. The current guilds do not have more than a few % of the total ANT supply. Nor had even close to 50% of the wrapped supply. This is absolutely and unequivocally false.

Let’s please stop making up false lies about the guilds here.

Let’s keep on task in response to the proposal at hand. There’s no need for this to digress. Thank you let’s stay pragmatic!

I’m not against austerity conversations, or fund allocation. But I ask that we have a serious conversation with full context, not just void defunding conversations.

@Yakitori where are you getting your numbers from regarding Budget of AA? You mention from 3.5M to 12M in two years, but this is factually false. I’d propose to move this conversation to a specific thread so we don’t mix conversations.

Regarding coin voting, which is a specific type of governance type, I fundamentally agree on Vitalik’s take. There are no black or white scenarios, for some circumstances it may be the best way to govern, for other it may be highly risky.


I wonder why every forum post ends the same? You ignore all relevant issues/requests/questions.

I’ve provided clarification from AA in these posts. Let me know if there’s any relevant open question.

I want funds to have a purpose -not just get funded since a few team members want more money

Post a strategy that follows Aragon’s mission and manifesto if you want funds to follow a different purpose, or a different Guideline to inform fund allocation. This whole conversation would be way more productive if you even read how Aragon DAO aims to allocate funds strategically, or the difference between Rules, Guidelines or Practices. If you don’t even bother to invest time to look into those, don’t expect me to invest mine in answering you.

If you cannot handle that some people in the DAO cant have differing opinions on the use of funds then quite frankly you are in the wrong field.

I love constructive criticism. I think it’s totally fair to have these conversations. I urge you to bring forward new Financial Guidelines or new Strategic Goals in a constructive way if you want those opinions to be actually transformed into action.

I am a ANT holder - I am a DAO member. And i expect to be treated with the same respect as such.

I respect people who contribute and doers. The fact that you say you hold ANT and/or are a DAO member doesn’t put you in those buckets for me.



@Joan_Arus Lets move this discussion to a new thread, regarding spending etc? I am not trying to be a prick - i just really do think the spending increases are really unsustainable, which hurts the purpose of Aragon.

And i hope you understand the pushback and criticism coming from me is fair - i am playing more of a devils advocate because so far what i have seen is that there is very little questioning about spending etc.

I also think it is dangerous to vilify people for not caring just because they joined recently - this again is not sustainable for our purpose - newcomers need to feel welcome and heard.

Just a post to inform that I moved the related comments from the Developer Grant program to this topic.



These numbers are similar to what I have tracked from here: Aragon. My work process here was copying all data into an excel sheet and providing labels based on the notes attached to the spends. Here are the labels I used:


Here was the output:

A couple things to note, this is from a month or so ago and subject to changes since then. Additionally, this is just my personal estimations and labels and don’t have complete clarity or background information. Additionally, I remember seeing a public google sheet with all the funding from the last rounds of budgets, that might be a valuable addition to this conversation as well.

The goal of this is just to add clarity to the ongoing conversation happening here and in the grants proposal. My 2c are that spending is high, but tend to think that the discount to book value should be addressed first before a deeper conversation about a restructure. I do think these are still valuable conversations!


Agreed on the discount being a priority, as that will be the first thing new participants to voting system will care about, confidence in governance.

The restructuring should be something we discuss carefully, there is no rush at the moment - but i thought to raise it as an attention point when thinking about new expenditure, first lets be very conservative going forward with new spending - discuss previous spending thoroughly and see where things can improve.

It is not anyones fault or blame, the treasury ballooned with the bull market and it is very easy to become complacent to spending. It is a natural outcome we discuss the overspending though.

For now lets just find clarity over what was actually budgeted to be spent, and find common ground on what the actual facts are

1 Like

Hey @alex-arca,

You have only picked up one of the AA wallets and they have changed over the years as well.

For H1 2021, the spending was $3 Million and then increased towards the end of the year. This was when the team were being rebuilt. See here

For 2022 total expenses were $6.9 Million. At that stage, we had budgeted for $11 Million and came in well below. AA Transparency Report - 2022

I can see the same thing happening for 2022 this year as well; funded teams are currently operating under what they budgeted. Growth - 86% of the budget remaining, Product - 83% of the Budget remaining, AZKR - 85% of the budget remaining, Vocdoni - 82% of the budget remaining, Ops 75% of the budget remaining, but we have reduced headcount and this will drop significantly in the following quarters. If there are efficiencies to be made, then I am sure we can discuss them, but there is no huge jump in expenditure in the last two years.

Hope this helps


Out of curiosity, what happens to the budget surplus? Specifically the $4m from 2022. Do the amounts budgeted to the guilds get rolled over or do they get clawed back by Aragon?

Clawed back or, depending on how you look at it rolled on. Eg say we budgeted for 1 million and only spent 750k. Say the next years budget is 1 million then we would only request 750k to the DAO

Okay got it. So the $250k thats unspent goes back to Aragon? Or that guild keeps the surplus $250k and then the next year the budget is revised down from $1m to $750k and they’re topped up with $500k?

We have not gone through that process yet, but I would imagine on whether they will be going for funding again.

What process are you referring to? Finalizing the excess budget process?

This is the first time the teams have been funded in the DAO before, all the funds were in the AA, and teams were paid from there, so it was one pot. Now we are moving to DAO funding, we have not gone through a team having leftover funds, and it is passed back to the DAO or rolled on to the next funding proposal.

Super helpful, thank you @AClay!

Are we to assume you’ve broken down the wallets that held the wrapped ANT during the votes mentioned and tracked their source of ANT?

Because I have, and it’s pretty blatantly clear that greater 50% was owned by team (and by team I mean broadly anyone who was paid by Aragon or who financially benefitted from those funding proposals, rather than the “current guilds” distinction you are trying to move the goal posts to ).