Should Boule candidates analyse a DeFi project?

Many AladdinDAO Boule candidates have been on the first public call one week ago, you can watch it here. Introduce AladdinDAO Boule Candidates - YouTube

I enjoy very much to see that AladdinDAO has been able to attract such a diverse group of candidates. Speaking of diversity, the only thing I missed is to have some female candidates too, a fact that we should try to fix in the next round.

For insiders like me, this presentation of the candidates was easy to get, we all understand that crypto lingo.

If you think in a mindset of a newcomer, it may be hard to understand who these people are and see the difference between the candidates.

To see this better, I propose that each candidate shares an analysis of a project they recently discovered. It can be a project they like or don’t like. It’s not about dropping alpha, it’s much more to see their level of understanding of DeFi by example.

Each candidate submits their written memo/video/audio recording at this forum, best on a new post to allow discussion and question, if any.

To limit the workload and keep it comparable, I suggest that the maximum time everyone should spend on this is 2-4 hours. Deadline would be Sunday evening 5.September.

I will make a minimal template for the post to make them more easy to compare.

Do you think this makes sens?

  • Yes
  • No

0 voters

Any other ideas?

Cross post on twitter:


Love the idea! To make things more interesting and reduce the bias a candidate may have towards the project he/she chooses to present, some suggestions:

1). Each candidate submits a project he/she already researched. The DAO then randomly reassigns the submissions to the candidates to analyze. This way, There should be always at least one candidate that has enough knowledge to review the analysis of the presenter’s.

2). Alternative to 1), the community submit and vote for the top 10, 20, etc. projects that will then be randomly assigned to the candidates to analyze.


While I agree with this in concept, I think it’s actually hard to execute it in a positive way. It actually has the potential to force a false positive.

You can’t have just anyone score the analysis, because if we look at the market as a whole, the average person makes poor analysis and loses money. So what the average person sees as a good analysis presentation is likely rating presentation skills and not actual analysis work.

If you have other Boule candidates score it, they are more likely to be harsh critics as they are currently in competition. They also come from many different backgrounds some as financial analysts, some as VCs, some as degens. They likely all make money in different methodologies and may not rate something highly if it uses a different methodology.

Lastly, its really hard to avoid holdings bias in this space. If someone is assigned $SUSHI as something to analyze, and the person rating it is a large $UNI holder, they might rate it more harshly even just subconsciously because of their views of $SUSHI. For some reason in this space, unlike traditional markets, we often end up having strong emotional biases for/against projects.

I think part of the goal of the Boule council is to draw on diverse expertise that has a track record, and try and get people from different backgrounds, with the expectation that their diversity of backgrounds will balance out and provide an above average amount of success.

To that end, if we wanted to do any scoring process, we’d probably have to do many types of review and scoring to make sure we aren’t over optimizing to one subset of candidate.


Thanks for the feedback, all valid points. I was thinking in a more quick and dirty approach, it’s not about project for future farming, it’s more to see who are the candidates are by choosing a project they are interested in.

If someone makes a very polished presentation which no depth, voters may see this. And anyway, if we publish this in the forum, other candidates would be free to discuss the quality, as long as it’s fair, why not?

Or we agree on a no comment rule, only none candidates are allowed to discuss to keep it popular?

1 Like

Good evening all, thanks it was great evening today in the metaverse.
Regarding the female Candidate i nominate Suji Yan
I personaly belive she is honest and respected person in WEB3.
I think She has a wide mindset with more than progressive point of view.



Thanks for mention this candidate, but I think nomination is over. In a not so fare time boule members have to be replaced and new people can be brought in.

1 Like

We took this idea and refined it, please continue here