Aave

More details can be found in the forum post here.

This Snapshot vote contains the below options:

1. Conservative Assumption
2. Aggressive Assumption
3. Conservative Assumption only for smaller markets (while allowing majors and strategic assets room to grow)
4. Abstain
5. Nay

The assumptions depend on the following question: should the community consider overall liquidity (aggressive) or only consider native-chain liquidity (conservative)?

Gauntlet’s research has so far shown that historically, native-chain liquidity plays an important role in the success of liquidations and insolvency mitigation.

This question depends on the community’s preference: does the community want the Aave protocols on non-Ethereum chains (e.g., Optimism and Avalanche) to be safe under current liquidity conditions (in which case, Conservative is the choice)? OR, do we want these protocols to grow to increase usage and, over time, hope that liquidity conditions improve as a result of Aave’s presence on these chains?

The strategy and preferences of the community greatly impact parameter recommendations.