This is what the clawback condition above states:
Please list a critical milestone. The critical milestone should be a measure of whether you’ve made best efforts to execute what is outlined in this proposal or not. If you fail to achieve your critical milestone, your grant may be clawed back.
We’re not contesting that we missed the full critical milestone. We ARE making the case that we have made substantial progress and that the critical milestone is very likely to be fulfilled, though on a delayed timeframe. Aman talked about about why the timeframe was delayed, how it was to some degree out of our control based on aspects of the ecosystem that we didn’t understand before beginning to implement, and gave details about our best effort attempt to adapt and deliver on the mission.
In the quote above and in the Token House’s governance docs, it sounds like enforcement of the clawback rule is designed to give room for exactly these kinds of considerations. This is not bending the rules. It’s just governance.