I’ve had a feeling a post like this was in bound for quite some time, and frankly I was thinking about opening this discussion myself to see how this process could be reinforced.
To summarize, Moonwell uses the Moonwell Asset Listing Framework (MALF) to list tokens on the forum for decision-making. These tokens go through what is essentially a three to four step process. The team reaches out to delegates or directly posts a MALF consistent proposal on the forums, and after a certain period the proposal can move to Snapshot, where I act as a facilitator to upload the proposal for its temperature check. As a superdelegate, I can assist projects in review and submission of their MALF, but regardless its a community decision to reject/approve these assets. This is no different than many other protocols (Arbitrum, Aave, etc) which have delegates with large delegations act as facilitators to bring proposals to Snapshot.
As for the MALF itself, it consists of decentralization parameters, market assessments, and general team reputation information, so as to give delegates an accurate view of the team and token. Now, keep in mind that MALF proposals are vetted by Gauntlet and still must go through an onchain vote; thus, if there is concern about the quality of a proposal then this should be affirmed in the forums to signal to other delegates. In terms of process, every team has followed this properly.
Candidly, I’m surprised on the recent votes as well (though they are only at the temperature check stage) and still require Gauntlet safety/risk evaluation and onchain approval. Of course, I am open to hearing any possible suggestions for changes or clarifying anything further.