Quick note on timing and Gauntlet’s post
GM. Appreciate the benchmarks Gauntlet put together. Some delegates have asked us to share a public response specifically on timeliness, since this has been the main critique Chainlink and Redstone have “flooded their DMs with” in regard to our solution. Not a fan of the background politics right now, but happy to get this on record.
We already cover this in Section 1G of our proposal, but here’s a quick summary.
Our solution has been live in production for nearly three quarters, operating across multiple chains and real environments. It has executed a large volume of liquidations, processing over $5,000,00 in debt and capturing over $330,000 in the process. The average time from bid to on-chain update is about 18 seconds.
This includes February 2025, which saw over $10 billion in liquidations, marking the largest event in crypto history. The system continued operating smoothly throughout, with no incidents and no bad debt generated.
The timing setup introduces a short, bounded delay and is fully configurable. As OpenZeppelin noted in their review, it can be tightened further if needed. But based on real usage, we’re already well within the 36-second window Gauntlet identified. All of this data is public, and the system is running live today across multiple chains with a proven, uniform track record. There’s very little guesswork left when performance is backed by nearly three quarters of production-grade data.
Now, onto the part that’s not so technical.
This is supposed to be an open application process. Yet over the last 96 hours, I’ve had dozens of 1-on-1 calls with delegates, and have more lined up this week, just to make sure our submission is actually being evaluated on the merits.
Nearly every single conversation has started with some variation of:
“I’ve already been approached by a dozen Chainlink people in DMs.” or “Redstone has said this about you, what’s your answer?”
I get that this is probably the status quo for DAO governance, but I’d be remiss not to point out that this kind of environment is likely a major deterrent for independent service providers even considering getting involved with Compound in the first place.
So, while most of the conversation is happening behind closed doors, I figured I’d shake things up a bit by asking a few questions publicly, which are ones I’d hope delegates would have asked some of the other applicants.
- Why did Chainlink offer Compound a materially worse revenue share (10% lower) than what they offer Aave, especially given that the additional revenue is negligible relative to Chainlink Labs’ size?
- If Aave is getting a better deal, can Compound delegates realistically expect to be prioritized for SVR rollout on L2s or should they expect to be integrated only after the favorite child has been served?
- Redstone claims a very successful pilot program with Venus on their two biggest markets (BNB & BTC on BNB Chain) from November 2024 as part of their Compound application. Yet there is no mention of this pilot in their official Venus forum post from just two weeks ago. Why?
-
Why is there no Venus governance post announcing or referencing the very impactful change to liquidation dynamics on the two biggest markets that Venus has (over 1.2B in TVL)? Especially considering how big this change is for lending protocols, and how the consideration triggered a multi-month (even year) long discussion on Compound.
-
Why has Venus never acknowledged this pilot publicly, via tweet or any official communication? Especially because they did tweet about API3’s proposal in August 2024 publicly?
-
Given that ChaosLabs officially reviewed our solution in accordance with our governance post, why is there no review, analysis or mention of the Redstone pilot program by ChaosLabs?
-
Why did a Venus team member recently suggest that any pilot should be limited to Unichain or Ethereum to avoid exposing BNB Core markets to risk, if Redstone already completed a successful pilot on BNB Core markets 8 months ago?
-
And the most obvious one: if the pilot was as successful as claimed, why isn’t Redstone’s OEV solution live on Venus today, 8 months later?
These are fair questions and i’m quite surprised that they have not come up during this RFP process. If timeliness is being used as the primary critique, then live performance, transparency, and follow-through should matter just as much if not more than private outreach or name recognition.