This proposal suggests renaming the X (Twitter) account owned and operated by AlphaGrowth @growcompound from “Compound Protocol” to “Compound Growth.” The change will address concerns regarding misrepresentation of the decentralized Compound Protocol and ensure AlphaGrowth operates within its appointed mandate. A swift renaming will reinforce the protocol’s decentralized ethos while preserving community trust and governance principles.
Motivation
AlphaGrowth was appointed by Compound DAO to manage operations and growth initiatives, not to represent the Compound Protocol as a whole. However, naming the X account “Compound Protocol” has created the false impression that AlphaGrowth speaks on behalf of the decentralized protocol, which undermines Compound’s foundational principle: decentralization.
This misrepresentation poses the following risks:
Loss of Community Trust: The Compound community expects neutrality and transparency in public-facing communications. Mislabeling AlphaGrowth’s account can erode this trust.
Reputational Damage: Externally, the account’s current name misleads tokenholders and the broader ecosystem into believing the protocol is centrally managed.
It is essential to maintain a clear distinction between AlphaGrowth’s growth role and the decentralized governance of Compound Protocol to avoid these risks.
Implementation
Rename account to “Compound Growth” to accurately represent AlphaGrowth’s mandate.
Conclusion
Using the Protocol’s name is bad practice, and will not fly in other DAOs that AlphaGrowth is pursuing deals with, such as Uniswap. In no world does it make sense for them to continue using it here. Adopting this proposal will reinforce Compound Protocol’s decentralized identity, mitigate reputational risks, and ensure AlphaGrowth operates within its mandate.
With the community’s support, AlphaGrowth can continue driving growth initiatives while maintaining the integrity of Compound’s decentralized governance structure. In such a case where this distinction continues to be ignored, the community may consider all remedies, including but not limited to ending AlphaGrowth’s mandate as growth representatives.
Sincerely,
Cameron Conrad
Concerned DAO Participant
While we’re discussing social media, a note that the announcements channel on discord is under learn for some reason and the last announcement was march 2023 with the previous one being august 2022.
I’d suggest moving it up to the top of the discord channels and having updates more often. At the very least the time the frontend was dns hijacked should have been announced.
To the extent that AlphaGrowth views its @growcompound X account as a deliverable within its agreement with the DAO, I am in support of @cmrn’s suggestion for the reasons he describes. Beyond these reasons, my impression (and it’s only that, an impression) is that the account is taking excessive advantage the protocol’s good reputation to advertise less well-known protocols and related web3 businesses through the podcasts they are co-developing. Presumably these podcasts are also meant to be a part of AlphaGrowth’s agreement with Compound, although I don’t see exactly how they fit into the project deliverables as described in their proposal. It would be helpful to know at least directionally what the flow of funds in these relationships looks like.
@misher’s question about whether @growcompound or @compoundfinance is the “real” X account is a clear case in point. Full decentralization would either mean no official X account, or possibly an X account that is community-governed, e.g. by a team directly appointed to do so by a governance vote (or at least snapshot). I would argue that Compound has no such account, though the case could be made that the DAO authorized AlphaGrowth to take on this role as part of its agreement. Personally, I think one has to really read between the lines to come to that conclusion and that @cmrn’s suggestion is reasonable.
Also to @misher’s point, @compoundfinance is the Compound Labs account, and while it has in the past played a role resembling an “official” Compound X account, that role was largely foisted on it by expectations of the public based on the actions of other DAOs that are less decentralized in practice than Compound. Labs’ account is not particularly active these days in any case.
This gets to the crux of the argument, and I’d agree a Protocol account has never and should never exist. The Labs account not being so much active these days does not impact the matter.
AG was elected by, and to represent, the DAO in operations and growth initiatives, not the Protocol as a whole, and the current lack of distinction is what has created the misrepresentation.
We all would love to see Compound x AlphaGrowth thrive even more!!
Being receptive to feedback is crucial in that, as anyone should be
