Across Protocol, a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO), recently found itself in the heated spotlight after being accused of intentionally rigging its governance process. The purported manipulation aimed to send $23 million in tokens to Risk Labs. This company’s relationship with Across Protocol’s core team has raised eyebrows and created controversy in the Web3 community.
The central controversy comes from two major proposals that address 150 million ACX tokens, worth over $22 million. Collectively, these proposals have sparked serious debate and alarmed many about the integrity of the DAO’s decision-making process.
Bryan Pellegrino, the founder of LayerZero, created quite a stir with his provocative statement. He alleged that Hart Lambur had some kind of insider knowledge with ACX tokens. These allegations further raised the suspicion around the proposals and the players behind them.
Lambur has uniquely denied that he knew in advance about the listing of ACX on Binance. In return, he disputed all allegations that he had any advanced notice of inside information to dictate the method of vote.
The first proposal received overwhelming support, with a total of 13.1 million tokenholders voting to approve the proposal with a 97% approval margin. Yet even the second proposal’s passage is being challenged, as proponents argue it passed on the back of votes from insiders.
Ogle, the pseudonymous founder of the rival app Glue, raised alarms that the voting process was being gamed. Ogle highlighted that Hart Lambur initially funded the second-largest voting wallet, which accounted for nearly 14% of the total vote, raising questions about undue influence.
In addition to the high-profile cut of Across Protocol, a coordinator’s timing regarding communication with Binance’s listing team—stretching on for several months—has raised eyebrows too. Critics warn that this long period of communication would have given potential insiders an inequitable head start.
