Everwisefool

@SamCKx @_CedarSteve Thank you Sam. You will get my votes. Easy decision- Let’s get things back on track.

To address @_CedarSteve and the Cedar DAO community, Firstly, Steve, thank you and everyone else who has continued to show faith in me over the years, despite everything. I believe most people recognise that I’ve always been here for this community, and that my work on Atlas is driven by one thing: delivering what this community deserves after its long-term support and patience. Even after stepping away from the token project, I never stopped working for this community. For over six months behind the scenes, I’ve made repeated attempts to resolve what are, in my view, totally illogical, unnecessary and self-inflicted issues created by the interim committee, largely driven by a single individual. I believe this has already caused tens of millions of dollars in damage. As former CEO of EverGrow Marketing Ltd and current CEO of Wallet Enterprises Ltd, I have repeatedly reached out to the two law firms retained by Cedar DAO to try to resolve matters. It makes no sense that lawyers claiming to represent this community would refuse to engage with the CEO of the company that ran operations and had the authority to grant the committee its limited mandate. When genuine attempts to resolve issues are ignored, it raises serious questions. To me, that is negligent and clearly not in the interests of token holders. That said, my focus has never changed. Everything I’ve done, including months of work behind the scenes, has been about what is best for this community. Many of you know that, and I appreciate those who have recognised it. I have been reluctant to step forward. But given where we are, if the community supports it, I am willing to take on a temporary role as chairman of the interim committee. My objective would be simple: fully audit the situation, understand where resources have gone over the last ten months, review all costs and obligations, and help transition to a properly elected committee focused on token holders, not personal agendas. I still believe this project can succeed. That’s why I’ve never walked away. Given the collapse in governance and the damage done, Steve’s proposal may now be the most practical path forward. If the community supports it, I will step in on a strictly temporary basis. This would be an unpaid role, limited to the minimum time required to stabilise the situation and reset governance properly. I would not remain in this role once Atlas Wallet goes live. The decision now sits with the community. But let me be clear: I have never left, and my commitment has never wavered. It is incredibly difficult to watch a project that had over $40 million in value when I handed it over ten months ago be driven to this point by actions that run directly against the interests of token holders. But recovery is still possible, if we act now. If Steve’s proposal is supported, I will do everything I can to fix this and put us back in a position to succeed ahead of the Atlas launch. We Are Cedar.

@Cedar holders please note @RealShawnte name is not on this proposal yet she paid herself more than anyone on this list. That’s theft. She must resign or be removed. @AtlasWallet_ we need your help.

@_CedarSteve @CedarDAO This is probably the most proactive, solution oriented piece of advice Cedar DAO has heard in months. I would definitely support this initiative Steve! ✅ 🗳️

She is defying the will of the community by refusing the repeated requests to vote

@_CedarSteve @RealShawnte @CedarDAO @RealShawnte took community money to pay herself without a community vote of approval and didn’t say a word about it. She knows the community wants to vote her out and is refusing the communities repeated requests for a new DAO vote.

Hey, As i see it we need: - A vote on remaining 2 committee members (including myself) to remain or removed. - Committee additions up to a 5 people committer with background in Legal, Finance, Blockchain Tech, Support and PR. - Moderation and Support payroll.

Cedar holders, I want to update the community on an important step regarding the ongoing governance situation. Shawnte has repeatedly claimed that a lawyer advised her that the actions she has taken regarding moderator salaries and staffing were legally permissible. Because those claims are being used publicly to justify decisions that have had serious consequences for the project, I have now contacted both of Cedar’s legal firms asking them to confirm whether this advice actually originated from either of them. At this stage I have not named either firm publicly, as they should first be given the opportunity to clarify the situation directly. However, the community is now calling in large numbers for the legal advice being referenced to be formally confirmed, properly attributed to the firm that provided it, and, if such advice does exist, made public and independently reviewed by external counsel. To understand why this matters, it is important to restate what the community actually voted for. On 14 August 2025, Cedar holders approved a governance proposal on Nation.io with 99.86% support. That proposal did not approve a general moderation “budget”. It explicitly: • Named five specific moderators • Defined their roles • Defined the exact compensation they would receive • Stated clearly that anyone not named would receive their final payment on 22 August 2025 In other words, the vote authorised specific people, for specific roles, at specific compensation levels. Since that vote: • Three moderators named in the vote have been removed without any vote. • Multiple unpaid moderators have also been removed. • Shawnte, who was not named in the vote, inserted herself into the paid structure. • The salaries of two named moderators were increased. • Shawnte assigned herself the highest individual salary Cedar has ever paid, far exceeding any amount approved in the vote. These actions were taken without a community vote. The justification being presented publicly is that these changes are allowed so long as the total moderation budget remains roughly the same. That argument does not withstand scrutiny. The vote authorised payments to specific named individuals, not a discretionary pool of funds. Redirecting funds from individuals approved in the vote to someone explicitly excluded from remuneration under that vote directly contradicts the proposal. Changing recipients, increasing compensation levels and directing funds to a member of the interim committee is not an administrative adjustment. It is a fundamental alteration of the governance decision the community approved. In governance and legal terms this raises serious issues including: • acting outside the authority granted by the vote • diverting funds allocated for specific purposes • self-dealing by a committee member financially benefiting from their own decision • potential breach of fiduciary duties owed to the community The issue is not whether the total amount spent remained similar. The vote authorised who could be paid and how much. Several shifting explanations have also been used to justify refusing to run a new community vote. Each time one claim has been disproven, a new narrative has appeared publicly. The latest claim is that a vote cannot be run because I hold tokens originally allocated to the founder. The history here is straightforward. At launch in September 2021, tokens were privately allocated to the founder and his founding team. These allocations were made before Cedar operated under any DAO structure and were not subject to restrictions. A significant portion of those tokens was distributed by the founder to members of the founding team. The remaining founder allocation was then privately assigned to me in September 2022, which was entirely within his rights. Over the following years I used a substantial amount of those tokens at my discretion to reward contributors and team members. These bonus distributions were transparent and stopped when I left the project. Separately, when Cedar relaunched and the interim committee was created, a significant treasury allocation was provided to that committee specifically so that, with community approval, it could be used in part for contributor bonuses. This was stated on the website. The tokens I hold privately are not part of that treasury. They were privately distributed founder tokens originating from the September 2021 launch allocation, and therefore do not fall under the governance of a partially formed DAO structure years later in 2026. Importantly: • The tokens I hold privately - after all contributor bonus distributions - have never been used by me to vote. • The only wallet I have ever used for governance votes was a separate wallet used for my personal bonus distribution, not the wallet holding the larger token balance. • Even if they had been used, the amounts involved have never been large enough to influence the outcome of any Cedar vote. The premise being used to block a new vote is therefore not only illogical, it is ultimately an excuse to prevent community governance. Meanwhile moderation across our channels has collapsed, the community has fractured and the project has suffered enormous damage. Over the past ten months alone Cedar has lost approximately $39 million in token value, almost $4 million in LP, while hundreds of thousands of dollars of treasury funds have been spent with little tangible progress. Because legal advice is being cited to justify actions that directly contradict a clear governance vote, the community is now asking for transparency. There are only two possibilities: A lawyer genuinely advised that these actions were permissible, in which case that advice should now be confirmed and independently reviewed. No such advice exists and a law firm’s authority is being invoked inaccurately to justify actions that contradict the community’s vote. I have therefore formally asked both legal firms associated with the project to clarify whether any such advice was given. The community deserves a clear answer so that this issue can be resolved and proper governance restored. We Are Cedar.

Cedar holders want a vote. We want a vote of no confidence in @RealShawnte and we want to vote for new committee members. The DAO is not functioning. It needs to be dissolved. @RealShawnte is destroying current and future value. She must resign or be voted out.

This is false, and @RealShawnte is abusing her position by using the official account that my team built over many years to spread misinformation. The community held a vote that named specific long-serving moderators and approved the exact individuals and salaries they were to receive. The poll also stated clearly that any remuneration to individuals not named would cease. Less than 100 days later, those same moderators the community had voted to compensate were removed by a single individual, and their salaries were redirected to that individual and others without any community vote or approval. That is the reality. As for the claim that “legal counsel” approved this: I challenge any lawyer who supports these actions to come forward publicly, name themselves and name their firm. Because if a qualified legal professional has genuinely advised that ignoring a DAO vote and redirecting funds to different individuals is acceptable governance, then they are clearly unfit to practise law. In that case, the DAO should immediately report that advice to the relevant Bar Association.

Another day and still no vote to remove @RealShawnte from @CedarDAO This month, almost $2,000 will go to her for managing socials. Money that was never allocated to her by way of a vote by the @CedarDAO community. I’m sure her “lawyer” will say it’s good though 🤣🤣🤣

Cedar holders, It is time to reset the direction of this project and be honest about where we are. Over the past ten months the interim committee has burned enormous time, energy and resources while delivering virtually nothing of tangible value to the community. Legal disputes, governance fights, negligence and endless procedural arguments have drained the treasury while the value of the token has collapsed. That reality cannot be ignored. If Cedar is going to survive, we need to dramatically simplify the mission. First, the DAO’s finances must be fully audited. Every ongoing cost should be reviewed and justified. Unnecessary legal expenses, corporate overhead and other drains on the treasury must stop immediately. The past year has shown how quickly these kinds of costs can hollow out a project. Second, the limited resources that remain should be redirected toward the community itself. That means moderation, communication and rebuilding an engaged social presence. The strength of any DAO ultimately comes from the alignment and energy of its holders. Third, we must recognise a hard truth. The idea that our resources could realistically be used to build multiple utilities or products has clearly proven impossible. Those resources have already been drained by more than 50 percent in a very short period of time. What remains must therefore be used carefully and intelligently. The only logical focus now is the one thing that still has real potential: the future value that may come from Atlas Wallet and the role this community can play in supporting it. Cedar should therefore become a focused DAO whose purpose is simple: to organise and mobilise the community in support of Atlas and to maximise the value of that relationship for Cedar holders. Everything else is a distraction. Endless proposals, complex governance experiments and attempts to build additional utilities will achieve nothing except consuming resources we no longer have. Our energy should be directed toward supporting the one asset that still has genuine potential. But none of this can happen while the project remains paralysed by the current governance crisis. The interim committee was given temporary custody of this project with a clear & limited mandate. Instead, over the last ten months that structure has overseen the destruction of more than 90 percent of the value that the former management committee handed into its care. That situation must now be resolved. And finally, I want to address you directly, @RealShawnte. However strongly you feel about the crusade you have been pursuing for the last six+ months, you must understand that this was never the mandate the community gave you when the interim committee was created and token holders elected their representatives. You are fully aware that the overwhelming majority of genuine token holders do not support the path you are taking. You have made your position clear many times. You believe the former management committee appointed when the founder legally transferred operations of the project over to EverGrow Marketing Ltd did not have the authority to make the decisions they made. You believe you now have the right to undo those decisions. You also believe the founder did not have the right to distribute the founder and founding team tokens he was assigned at launch in the way he chose. You have been heard, but there is no logical or legally sound support for the positions you are taking. The community has overwhelmingly rejected your actions. Continuing down this path does not move the project forward. It only prolongs conflict, places you personally at risk, and continues the destruction of value for every holder in this project. So I am asking you to recognise the reality of the situation. For the sake of this community, and for yourself, step down. If you don’t, you will be voted off anyway, but you will have knowingly caused further material damage to token holders, and no doubt drained further community resources without authorisation. And if you genuinely believe that the community supports you and your positions, then the solution is simple; run a DAO vote of no confidence in yourself and allow token holders to decide whether they have confidence in your self-appointed leadership. The tokens you dispute will not be used to vote - you have my word, and if you doubt that, you have the blockchain to confirm after that vote. If the community supports you, the vote will prove it. If they do not, the result will speak for itself. Either way, the decision should belong to the holders, not you. Cedar will rebuild. Many of community that built this project is still here and still believes in its potential. From this position, where our market cap is at all-time low, we can even attract new holders to our community, with a genuine value proposition. But rebuilding cannot begin while one individual holds total control and continues to act in opposition to the clear wishes of the broader community. So please, Shawnte, step aside today and allow governance to be restored with the approval of the holders rather than through unilateral action. From there, what is left of the committee can begin the rebuild. We Are Cedar.

@SamCKx Resign now @RealShawnte , you’re not wanted by most cedar holders.

@RealShawnte @_CedarSteve @Shawnte This is what Cedar DAO gets when asking for information about this third party lawyer. You get crickets and silence. What are you hiding Shawnte? Present their name and credentials. We deserve to know! Stop 🛑 using DAO funds for Your personal escapades. ✋

@nexusfrontiers Are you going to put up a realms vote Bard?

Game changer. 😉

The second Royal Commission report on Covid is out, with a lot of very tough reading for the last Govt. It suggests the Auckland lockdown went too long and against advice, the Govt did not move fast enough on RATs, and that there was advice against kids getting the vaccine

💥HIPKINS MUST RESIGN 💥 The “Team of 5 million” must now fiercely call for Chris Hipkins to resign! The Phase Two COVID Royal Commission report confirms what many Kiwis suspected… the Government didn’t always follow its own public health advice. Now we’re learning what really happened behind closed doors. 🦠 Officials warned about myocarditis risks in teenagers (12 -17 yr olds) and advised against a two-dose mandate for young people. The Government pushed ahead anyway. 🦠 Ashley Bloomfield gave advice that was ignored. Jacinda, Hipkins and their ministers thought they knew better. 🦠 Unredacted Cabinet papers show the Ministry of Health warned Chris Hipkins that the Auckland boundary was unnecessary and impractical and should be lifted. Hipkins ignored that advice and kept the boundary in place for another 32 days over Christmas and New Year…without telling the public. All the while we were constantly told: “We are following the health advice.” Clearly, that wasn’t true. Politicians thought they knew better than the experts. Then there’s the economic damage. 💰 Treasury warned from the beginning that COVID spending must be "timely, temporary and targeted." Labour ignored that advice. 💰 The result? A $60 billion COVID Response and Recovery Fund across 821 programmes…about half of which had little or nothing to do with the pandemic. The Royal Commission says Labour’s “highly stimulatory fiscal and monetary policies drove house prices to unsustainable levels and fuelled inflation.” Put simply…that’s why families today are struggling with: ⬆️ Higher mortgages ⬆️ Higher rents ⬆️ Higher grocery bills ⬆️ A brutal cost-of-living crisis LABOUR MADE NEW ZEALAND BROKE!!!! It also explains why Chris Hipkins refused to front publicly at the Royal Commission hearings. Kiwis lost businesses. Families were divided. Kiwis died. People became vax injured. And now we discover crucial health advice was ignored, billions were wasted, and the truth wasn’t told. They exacted unbridled and unnecessary power over us all. Hipkins was the Minister in charge of the COVID response. Leadership demands accountability. CHRIS HIPKINS MUST RESIGN. #HIPKINSRESIGN

@everwisefool @CedarDAO @RealShawnte @SamCKx @MariosDemX Time to sack her and recoup illegal self pay.

@ohhanxiety @RealShawnte

🤔

To all @CedarDAO holders. Pls keep asking for a vote. @RealShawnte the thief, will try to avoid and make excuses. She knows she will get rolled. Cmon @SamCKx @MariosDemX Let’s Vote now