Kat

Strike strikes again!!!!! ⚡️ @strikeperps has launched fiat on ramps. You can now fund your Strike account directly with Visa, Mastercard and 10+ major blockchain networks. Apple Pay and bank transfers are next. This is a massive upgrade that lowers friction and entry barriers. Well done, team!

@DerekFoltz1 @strikeperps

@TheRealWeb3Kat @strikeperps Massive.

Strike strikes again!!!!! ⚡️ @strikeperps has launched fiat on ramps. You can now fund your Strike account directly with Visa, Mastercard and 10+ major blockchain networks. Apple Pay and bank transfers are next. This is a massive upgrade that lowers friction and entry barriers. Well done, team!

@ThirdDegree_OG @Cardania777 @EdnStuff @Cardano It’s well documented that they said they were pursuing legal action… I remember that clearly from when this all started.

@TheRealWeb3Kat @Cardania777 @EdnStuff @Cardano I think iagon got themselves into some deep shit with all this and now they’re trying to backpedal by saying “we never said we would sue” lmao

Yesterday's Iagon AMA brought more clarity on (not suing) Nuvola for stealing code and breach of partnership. @EdnStuff , I appreciate your role and takes in the @Cardano community. Like me, you are a truth seeker. You firsthand witnessed the whole suing or not suing debacle. Is it not time to acknowlegde publicly @NuvolaDigital did not do anything wrong? Iagon accused Nuvola without any proof causing harm to Nuvola's reputation and confusion in the Cardano community. It's time the community unites around the truth.

@wolf31o2 yes, I was specifically referring to crypto. good point about the other examples, but there are some factors that are quite specific to our bubble.

@TheRealWeb3Kat By no ecosystem, I assume that you are limiting specifically to "crypto," and not broader open source, such as Linux Foundation, Cloud Native Computing Foundation, or Apache Software Foundation. Outside our bubble, many seem to be quite ahead of our tiny corner of technology.

Sometimes we forget that Cardano's governance is experimental. Cardano is attempting to do something that essentially no ecosystem has done at scale: decentralized Treasury governance with elected representatives and no central authority. That being said, it should support ecosystem growth, it shouldn't consume us and it shouldn't be the only thing we talk about. The priority needs to be: building, creating liquidity, attracting new developers and driving adoption. Nobody is here FOR GOVERNANCE and we should not allow governance discussions to create an illusion of productivity while momentum suffers.

@BeatriceAnihiri New rule, which I’ll also impose on myself: for every post about governance thou shall do 3 posts about things being built!

There are at least 5 cool things that happened on Cardano this week that should be celebrated but instead my tl is just governance and fighting 😭😭😭

@yeaookk Sure is, respect you a lot!

@TheRealWeb3Kat Yep, definitely going to disagree there and that's okay.

A short timeline. Just what happened, in order. Decide for yourselves. 1. A DRep (@NaVi_GaT0R) asked whether DReps with paid IO-linked roles should abstain on IO's treasury proposals. A normal conflict-of-interest question. 2. Charles did not answer the question. He went after Iagon - publicly, repeatedly, over days, to his 1M+ follower account, with IO employees and IO-aligned accounts amplifying. He said Navjit had "lost the plot," called the concern "objectively wrong," and publicly stated Iagon's leadership should be replaced or the project could collapse. 3. IAG fell ~32% in 24h. Holders - who are also ADA holders - lost real money. 4. As IAG was crashing, the price-crash chart was posted at Charles. He replied with a video clip of Bane: "Your punishment must be more severe... not of your body... of your soul." 5. Charles began describing the conflict-of-interest question as an "attack on his ambassadors." It was not. No ambassador was attacked. A DRep asked, in public, whether DReps with paid IO ties should abstain on IO's proposals - a standard governance question. Reframing a question as an "attack" is what made everything that followed look justified. 6. On that false premise, Charles hosted an X Space and said, about the token holders of a project in his own ecosystem: "I don't give a shit about your token holders... I don't give a shit about your bag holders... If you attack my ambassadors, I will burn you to the ground." He also said the way out was to "apologize" and "back the fuck off." 7. When a community member said I was "obsessed," Charles replied that I have "CDS," that it is "incurable," and that people should "let him go." CDS - Cognitive Dysfunction Syndrome - is a veterinary diagnosis: age-related dementia in dogs and cats. So a sitting DRep raising sourced concerns was described in the language a vet uses for a deteriorating animal. 8. Charles then posted a unity video: the only thing that can destroy Cardano is internal fighting. 9. When some Japanese DReps voted against IO's research proposal, Charles posted directly to the Japanese community: if the proposal did not pass, "Cardano will lose its scientists" and "our lab will be forced to close." He then asked the community to "delegate to dReps who support Cardano's research agenda" - in other words, to move voting power away from DReps who voted the wrong way. When that pressure did not deliver the result, the threat hardened: approve the proposal, or be responsible for ending Cardano's research entirely. Only after this also failed to work did the tone suddenly soften. 10. As hundreds of holders engaged with these concerns, Charles shifted tone - "#strongertogether," inviting conversation. 11. I took that at face value. Then I did something he never did. After he attacked Iagon, after the "burn you to the ground," after his words helped wipe ~32% off a token held by thousands - I was the one who extended a hand. I publicly offered him a private, no-recording, one-on-one call. Man to man. Not for me - for the ecosystem. The person who was attacked took the first step toward peace. 12. His public answer to that olive branch was the pattern again, in one post. He said: "Tell him to go to hell." He demanded I issue "a public apology FOR EVERYTHING he said" before he would even speak. He said: "You don't treat me like a human toilet." And then, in the last three lines: "He's trash. Everyone can see it now. We move on." Read that ending again. I offered him a private, calm conversation - and his response was to call me "trash" and tell the audience that this proves something about me. He attacked, and in the same breath framed the attack as evidence against the person he attacked. That is the reversal in its purest form: be the aggressor, then announce that the aggression exposes the victim. That is the sequence. I offered a calm, private conversation - and that was the response to it. One more thing worth seeing plainly. Not days apart. The same afternoon - roughly two hours between these two posts. First, in public, to the ecosystem: "Cardano is alive. The community is engaged... You are not passive holders. You are owners." "Let me show up the way I should." "I am inviting all of you to sit down and have a real conversation." "I am 100% focused on Cardano and Midnight. #strongertogether" Roughly two hours later, to me, after I publicly offered exactly that - a private, calm, one-on-one conversation: "Tell him to go to hell." "Have him issue a public apology FOR EVERYTHING he said." "You don't treat me like a human toilet." "He's trash. Everyone can see it now." That is the gap. "Stronger together" for the audience. Two hours later, "go to hell" and "he's trash" for the person who took him up on it. A real invitation to talk does not come with a demand to grovel first - and it does not curdle into "go to hell" within the same afternoon. Look at the whole shape of this. He attacked. He did not answer the question - he went after the people who asked it. When the damage was done and holders were losing money, he posted about punishment and souls. He said in public he would burn people to the ground. He pressured an entire national community to vote his way or be blamed for the end of Cardano's research. And then, step by step, he became the victim. The question became an "attack." The critics became aggressors. The man with 1M followers and the treasury proposals became the wronged party defending the vulnerable. When I - the one who was attacked - offered peace, he framed himself as the one owed an apology, and called me "trash" for asking. That reversal has a name: DARVO. Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender. It is not a diagnosis. It is a pattern, and the record above is the pattern, step by step, in his own words. So the practical question stands: Is this conduct - the attacks, the Bane clip aimed at people losing money, the "burn you to the ground," the pressure on the Japanese community, the false "victim" framing, the rejection of a good-faith olive branch - the conduct of someone who should be trusted with hundreds of millions of ADA from the community treasury? Cardano does not have a "leader." It has a community, a treasury, and contractors who ask that community for funding. IO is one of those contractors - currently asking for hundreds of millions of ADA, with a track record of missed timelines. A contractor asking the community for money does not get to attack the members of that community for doing the exact thing the governance system was built for: participating, voting, and asking questions. Respect for ADA holders is not optional for someone requesting their treasury. It is the job. Screenshots of every quote above are attached. Read them in full, and decide for yourselves.👇👇👇

@yeaookk We'll have to disagree on that, I do think singling individuals out when in reality it's a systemic issue that needs to be addressed, constitutes a targeted, personal campaign that also included coercive pressure about how to vote.

@TheRealWeb3Kat @HolgerCardano24 Mentioning specific people doesn't make it a personal attack. As in it was an actual attack to ask about conflict of interest?

@yeaookk @HolgerCardano24 If it wasn't personal, why did he tag individual, personal accounts?

@TheRealWeb3Kat @HolgerCardano24 It wasn't a personal attack, it was based on something real. A possible conflict of interest and asked how they will vote. Unlike calling out a nationality of people, which actually is personal.

@HiiiPowerRevo Conflict of interest is a systemic issue in governance that we have not addressed. It's a bigger issue than just "should midnight ambassadors vote on Cardano proposals". The discussion is needed, targeting individual DReps the way he did is not the way to go about it.

@TheRealWeb3Kat @HolgerCardano24 Does it ethically make sense for midnight ambassadors to be voting on Cardano proposals ??

@Dax_bv @HolgerCardano24 Conflict of interest in governance is an ongoing, systemic issue. I even spoke about it previously. Nobody ever said he isn't right, but saying the whole thing started because of someone asking an innocent question is a lie.

@TheRealWeb3Kat @HolgerCardano24 I mean. He is right. There is a conflict of interest there. He just called them out.

👏 congrats everyone!

@Paulwtadatsla I post about them every single day, check my page :)

@TheRealWeb3Kat It’s not enough to just have stablecoins. There need to be killer DeFi applications that genuinely improve capital efficiency before institutions will be willing to come in. So you should pay more attention to those DeFi projects that are truly grinding and building.

USDCx was pitched as a savior for Cardano's stablecoin landscape but it feels like it was launched and then never spoken about again. It has no volume, no growth, and terrible liquidity. What's the plan?

@defi411 Did you bother to look at my page before writing this? In the last week or so, I've posted about Surf, Strike, Ascend, CSWAP, SyncAI, Pulse, Nuvola. I'm one person, but I do my part to bring awareness to projects and updates. Hope you can say the same!

I feel for builders in the Cardano ecosystem. Nobody has much interest in talking about cool things that are being developed or teams that are grinding. I get that it's budget season but we are literally becoming known as the chain that bickers about drama and governance, neither of which we can take to the bank.

I think he explained quite clearly what had changed and the rationale for why he was changing that one vote. And it isn't accurate to say "the only thing that happened was Charles blocking you", there has been ALOT of drama and negativity surrounding Charles over the last several weeks, why would you assume Dave made the decision based on one factor (the blocking) alone?

I am not suggesting that you never trusted the leadership. I am asking why you stopped trusting it and reversed some of your YES votes. What happened? What changed? The only thing that happened in between was Charles blocking you. So if that’s the case, you are not a responsible DRep and your decisions for our 10B ecosystem’s future are not based on facts or what your delegators would want, but on your personal feelings. If this is not the case, please enlighten me and the community on why you changed your votes. I am not saying it’s wrong to change your vote. I am saying it is irresponsible to change it based on how you woke up in the morning.

Dave changed all his IO votes from YES to NO, because Charles blocked him on X. This is the exact behavior Whale had last year when he decided due to his personal vendetta with Charles to downvote all IO proposals and insult him in the rationale. Does this reflect the will of his delegators? Is this serious and responsible behavior? No it is not. But, without being able to scientifically explain it, at this point I am convinced that it is cosmically required for an anti-Charles force to exist. It can never be zero. And it is somehow expressed within the community. You can’t get rid of it, it stays here with us and we all need to know how to coexist with it. First we acknowledge it. Secondly, we ignore it. WE DO NOT ENGAGE, there is no point. Anti-Charles force is a constant, it does not have to do with people. Even if a person disappears, the portion of the force he controls will be transferred to someone else. So the only thing we can do is observe, vote and redelegate. And thus find the balance for Cardano governance. This is how we win.

@masatoalexander 100%

@TheRealWeb3Kat if only there was a way to vet people with lower stakes

raising money is definitely a skill, and a critical part of any venture. even so, it's important to realize that there's a HUGE difference between RAISING funds and SPENDING them effectively.