Humpy's (ongoing/alleged) governance capture of #comp is different than it was for 

Balancer / SushiSwap. Lending protocol governance capture has many more avenues for a catastrophic outcome for protocol *users* than an amm protocol, especially unintentional ones.

This one was actually good (for Comp holders and the greater DeFi space imho).

Founders/delegates/whoever has effective protocol control should be pushed into activating fee distribution if the project is ready for it. Most DeFi behemoth dapps are past ready.

Launch Liquid Backed NFTs with /liquidmint • Curating /shroomiez /retardio /911

I dont completely buy that argument that this was all about fee capture. Do you think if comp distributed 50% of all profits to comp holders this would be less likely to happen? why?

If it did distribute profits to holders, market cap would have been significantly higher, making it significantly harder to do what we just saw happen to COMP.

I think thats a very optimistic take on the crypto market's pricing of revenue distribution and Compound's revenue - but - maybe you're right!

The largest buyers are literally left and right curvers who DCF the shit out of this shit

So most likely it would have a better impact/probability in protecting the protocol from such eventualities