Ampleforth DAO Cancels $2.5M USDC Payment Proposal Without Vote

Ampleforth (Ampleforth) decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) had a proposal submitted to pay out 250 million USDC (approximately KRW 336 billion), representing 98.5% of the treasury's USDC holdings, but it was canceled without voting or fund transfer. Proposal 54, created on September 12, 2026, at 10:30 PM KST, sought to pay 250 million USDC to a wallet for completing SPOT ecosystem analysis tool development under the title 'Observatory for SPOT - Completed-Work Treasury Grant.' The proposal aimed to transfer assets from the Ethereum mainnet's USDC contract directly to the proposer's wallet. Of the approximately 2.54 million USDC in the treasury, 98.5% was requested, representing 70.2% of the total displayed assets worth $3.56 million (approximately KRW 479 billion). The proposer received delegated voting rights for about 87,238.5461 FORTH tokens before submitting the proposal and did so approximately 19 minutes later. The relationship between the delegating address and the proposer's wallet remains unverified. Proposal 54 is now marked as 'Canceled' on Tally with zero votes for approval, rejection, or abstention. The cancellation block number is recorded as 25973374, though exact timing and execution entity in Korean time are unknown. No USDC transfer or DAO treasury loss occurred. Previously, the media reported that a similar $2.5 million USDC transfer proposal was rejected in voting without fund movement. This case differs from a smart contract vulnerability incident where the treasury was compromised; instead, it highlights governance structure flaws related to low submission thresholds and concentrated asset holdings. Ampleforth's official documentation states FORTH governance involves Discord and forum discussions, formal proposals, targeted debates, off-chain signal votes, technical reviews before on-chain voting. Final voting is a binding step that approves executable transactions. FORTH holders can vote directly or delegate voting rights. Therefore, if delegated voting power exceeds the submission threshold, proposers can submit treasury-related proposals to the governance system. The pre-discussion process mentioned in official documentation for Proposal 54 remains unconfirmed. The proposal described the payment as retroactive funding for completed work but did not specify the work's value, proposer identity, or prior DAO commissioning of the task. GoPlus Security assessed this proposal as a 'malicious governance proposal,' noting it required 75,000 FORTH to submit and 600,000 FORTH to pass. The proposer's voting power met the submission threshold but fell short of passing requirements. GoPlus Security's assessment is their judgment; no evidence confirms malicious intent or fund theft by the proposer or delegator. Ampleforth has not issued any official statement regarding Proposal 54. This case aligns with ongoing concerns about token concentration in DeFi governance, where combined single-wallet proposal authority and concentrated DAO treasury assets could increase community review burdens even without actual loss. Verified process only includes proposal submission and cancellation; the reason for cancellation and relationship between proposer and delegator require further verification.