schrutebucks.neo

In between selling paper I was buying paper. For what? Physical Schrute Bucks on neo.coupons 🔥 Motivate your friends&family by giving out your own phsyical SchruteBucks. Connect your NEO wallet, topup a voucher with any NEP-17 token and done!

@wintervelt @QvisContraNos @VeraCausa9 @QvisContraNo @wintervelt Direct link to PDF: ia600907.us.archive.org/10/items/artem…

@wintervelt @QvisContraNos @VeraCausa9 @QvisContraNos @wintervelt Here is the 🇬🇧 UK version (PDF): archive.org/download/artem… I used ChatGPT to translate it, works like a charm 🫰 Don't use Grok, it can do simple tasks, not sophisticated ones. Use Claude, Gemini or ChatGPT.

The perfect symmetry of the Zeus Artemision bronze.

@lockyer83 It's the Neo X-wrapper, what a joke 🥲

📝A fresh Kraken listing for $NEO is a massive catalyst as U.S. investors finally have easy access Here’s why the recent whale sell-off is actually bullish: A single large holder offloaded over 10% of the entire $NEO supply, tokens he accumulated over several years. That heavy overhang is now gone. We’re seeing the first signs of a bottom forming and the early stages of a real turnaround. The supply has been cleanly absorbed by new whales, strong hands, market makers, and long-term holders who are positioning for the next altseason. The timing of the Kraken listing couldn’t be better. It opens the door wide for U.S. retail and institutional capital that previously couldn’t access $NEO easily. After growing frustration with Binance (and questions around market manipulation), many are actively looking for credible alternatives. $NEO has always had the tech and the builders. What it lacked was convenient U.S. exchange access. That bottleneck is now removed. Add in the recently updates and sgnificantly faster block times Soon-to-be divisible $NEO (fractional trading & sending directly from exchanges) This is the cleanest setup $NEO has had in years.The only time better than today to accumulate $NEO and $GAS… was yesterday. Who’s loading up? 👀

@Linda85671930 @olthof_tom @KritischePatri

@olthof_tom @KritischePatri Dit is toch niet normaal!! Ze slaan terwijl de mensen al wegliepen!! Die politiemensen moeten aangeklaagd worden! Normaal is het altijd de-escalatie maar nu niet. Wat hebben ze een hekel aan de normale bevolking!! Dit wordt een burgeroorlog l.

Loosdrecht nu. Nadat er plotseling met zwaar vuurwerk richting de politie werd gegooid, kwam de mobiele eenheid aangereden en ging chargeren. Deze beelden ontving ik zojuist van een getuige. #azc #loosdrecht

@ricklock99 Well, in terms of NEO, maybe we can get some unverified numbers to proof all is fine 🥲

@getschrutebucks It should be, right? Why the smart contracts allowed that is something that I can't understand.

"The current structure is roughly 813,000 FUSD backed by around 138,000 USD in FLM, 80,000 USD in NEO, and 180,000 USD in GAS" Even if you assume the full FLM position could be offloaded at face value, that's still ~50% undercollateralized.

The situation on Neo is simple: Forget the theoretical stuff and the fantasies. There is no "Neo Council." What exists is: two founders with enormous funds at their disposal, a group playing house and getting paid for it, a class of outcasts, and the holders. There are also core developers and NSPCC. Erik controls the addresses holding NEO. Da Hongfei controls non-NEO assets, NGD, and its investments. Each side is sitting on over $200 million. The group playing house, private groups, receives tens of thousands of dollars per month from contracts and consensus nodes. "Community" initiatives received over $430000 per month in 2025 alone. Not all groups are dead weight. Some, like NeoSPCC and the core developers, are genuinely competent and deliver real work. But they're the exception, not the rule, and there's nothing in between. You either have teams doing excellent work or teams delivering virtually nothing. The most competent ones often have to compensate for those who don't deliver, and even with their skill, it's still not enough to carry an entire ecosystem. The rest show up once in a while, work on mostly pointless projects (if they even deliver anything), derail discussions, and disappear. Behind the scenes, they also actively work to sabotage competitors (when they rarely appear). Then there are the outcasts. Community members with no contracts, no node, no seat at the table. People who try to build or contribute but don't see results. When they need funding, they have to beg and humiliate themselves for $300, $500. Many have probably sensed they belong to a different caste, but the arrangement is so absurd that they may not have fully processed it. On one side, people collect five figures a month to deliver nothing. On the other hand, people scrape for pocket change to keep contributing. And this isn't accidental. The first group created the second. The contracted insiders use their influence, amplified by the network's centralization, to ensure that no outside group or project can rise. They gatekeep funding, visibility, and access through their influence over NGD. That's why the outcasts are outcasts. Not because they lack competence, but because allowing them to grow would threaten the arrangement. Now, the founders are pissed at each other and have decided to split, not the network, but the management and funds. DHF has invested in his own preferences without accountability, even to his co-founder and director, Erik Zhang. What changed is that Erik will likely stop directing NEO toward DHF's chosen investments. But that barely matters, since DHF still controls over $200 million in assets, even if you exclude the Binance stake, which nobody knows the size or worth of. The difference is that Erik will now start deploying funds on his side. Before, DHF decided alone. Now, both will. Even if Erik stops sending to the multisig, DHF still has more resources under his control. What happens next? The near-impossible scenario is DHF and Erik reaching an agreement and consolidating funds. What will happen is simpler: if DHF refuses to disclose where and how the money went, Erik stops transferring funds, and each side invests in whatever they want, independently. The conflict doesn't resolve; it just becomes less relevant as both parties shift focus to their own goals. Will DHF use non-NEO assets to cover project expenses? Will Erik start hiring on his own? Very likely. The change is that both founders now have greater autonomy to manage funds. Could that solve Neo's problems? The problem on Neo is the existing cartel. We won't see improvement if the same groups that have failed for a decade continue to do so. Keeping them in place removes all accountability for the current state of things: the lack of adoption, the lack of activity, the lack of everything on this network. The platform is technically capable of far more than what's being built on it today. The failure is not technical; it is the total absence of consequences when these groups steer the network toward expensive and useless projects. Imagine giving nearly 500k per month to grow your project, only to end up smaller year after year. Let's be honest about what's left: a handful of people operating as a cartel, a group that exists to protect itself. The network is in disarray, and some people are earning a lot while delivering very little. Some are proposing that we let the people getting paid handsomely for producing nothing choose who controls the network. Let's give more power to the same caste that has drained the treasury while the outcasts beg for scraps. What do you think happens next? It's not hard to predict. And there's another problem, maybe the worst one. NEO holders will barely show up to any vote. Governance participation is already low, not for the reasons many imagine, but simply because nobody wants to read a wall of text explaining candidate A versus candidate B. Handing decision-making power to a process where almost no one participates is just another dead end. In short, the situation is very problematic. But the fragmentation might actually be an improvement: real decentralization, born out of anger and distrust. One side literally does not trust the other. And that mutual distrust might be exactly the catalyst for building blockchain-based mechanisms that are actually realistic and enforceable, rather than governance theater. As for the future, there are only two paths: one with the same groups, and one without them. We already know where one of those leads: one transaction per minute, on a good day.

@erikzhang @snakey_rob @dahongfei Poeh man. At first I was super enthousiastic about you coming back, but now it starts to feel like whining. Sue Da or move on and make the best out of the situation, but please stop the rants which is not motivating for anyone.

@snakey_rob @dahongfei He transferred hundreds of millions of dollars to a private company, which is certainly illegal. As a director of NF, I use NF funds to pay salaries to those who work for NF, which is certainly legal.

Statement on a Temporary Emergency Governance Arrangement for Neo Foundation Neo Foundation is now, in effect, in a state of dysfunction. Some community members and staff have gone without the funding they are owed for an extended period, my own salary has been suspended for eight months, and most of the Foundation’s operational departments have already begun to shut down. At the same time, Da Hongfei has still failed to provide the community with a sufficiently open, transparent, and credible account of the Foundation’s financial condition. To prevent further harm to the NEO ecosystem as a result of governance failure, I, as the founder of NEO, a core developer, and an NF Board Member, will, effective today, join with certain core developers and community leaders to establish a temporary committee. This committee will temporarily assume the relevant functions of Neo Foundation, and will manage and use NF funds to ensure the continued operation of the NEO ecosystem. This is an emergency measure taken under extraordinary circumstances. It is temporary in nature and is not intended to serve as a permanent governance arrangement. Once either the governance reform proposal put forward by me or the one put forward by Da Hongfei gains broad acceptance from the community, this arrangement should be terminated immediately and replaced by a new governance mechanism. During the period in which the temporary committee carries out these responsibilities, every funding decision it makes or participates in will be publicly disclosed to the community in a transparent manner and subject to community oversight.

@ngd_neo @dahongfei "That's what decentralization looks like when someone means it." After years of owning 50% of the supply 😭

After 12 years, Neo Foundation still controls 50%+ of total NEO supply. Treasury never dropped - actually grew with GAS conversions back to NEO. @dahongfei take: "We probably should give 50% back to the community. The Foundation doesn't need 50% of the token and voting power after twelve years. It's not healthy. It's against the spirit of a blockchain project." That's what decentralization looks like when someone means it.

@jackfriks @trust_mrr m.youtube.com/watch?v=uRoCMd… You're Wuphf b2b 🤙

i put my beloved startup for sale a few weeks back 18 total offers so far, 2 of them were semi serious. since then: 40% growth in last month...

Regarding the recently published financial report on Neo’s situation, I would like to share my initial impressions. They are not positive. Since this is presented as a preliminary report, I will avoid going into the details of specific numbers for now. My first perception is that the market did not receive it well. Neo dropped several positions on CoinMarketCap, moving from around #136 to #143. One of the main issues is the apparent attempt to create a conceptual separation between the Neo Foundation and NGD. NGD was originally created with resources from the Foundation and was responsible for development and ecosystem operations. However, the report presents NGD almost as if it were something structurally separate. This raises a natural question. If NGD was created entirely with resources from the Neo Foundation, why is it being treated as an independent structure when discussing assets and responsibilities? The situation becomes even more confusing when the report raises concerns about the centralization of Foundation resources, while the resources associated with NGD appear to be controlled by a single side. The implied logic seems to be that what belongs to the Neo Foundation belongs to both founders, while what belongs to NGD belongs only to one of them. Another issue is the nature of the document itself. The numbers are described as preliminary, there are no verifiable addresses for most of the assets, and some of the information presented is difficult to independently confirm. For anyone familiar with how transparency reports usually work in crypto, this makes the document feel closer to a public relations exercise than a proper financial disclosure. The overall context reinforces that perception. The writing style differs significantly from previous communications and appears to be part of the same recent “PR” package that included the interview and several coordinated posts. Taken together, the tone feels more like a narrative effort than an unbiased financial report. Another notable omission is the lack of discussion of FLM related assets and activities, despite the significant historical allocations to those initiatives. One detail that particularly stood out was Erik’s obligation of 80 BTC to the Neo Foundation. This refers to a loan that the Foundation granted to him. The existence of internal loans between founders and the Foundation is not necessarily unusual. What is unusual is the way this specific loan is presented. The report explicitly highlights Erik’s obligation, while other loans appear grouped together with other lines, making it unclear to whom those loans were issued or how much is owed. At that moment the document stops feeling like a neutral financial report. By singling out one individual obligation while leaving the rest aggregated, the report creates a clear narrative around a specific person. Whether intentional or not, this makes the section look less like financial disclosure and more like a public relations maneuver. If Erik owes 80 BTC to the Foundation, that raises several obvious questions. What was the loan for? When was it issued? Why is it denominated in BTC when most other figures in the report are presented in USD? More broadly, similar questions could be asked in the opposite direction. How much does NGD owe to the Neo Foundation, considering that NGD itself was created using Foundation resources? Have any funds flowed the other way that should also be accounted for? Another element that contributes to the tension is the asymmetry of transparency. Erik’s addresses and holdings are public and easily verifiable on chain, while NGD’s financial structures, investments, and accounts remain private. At the same time, the report suggests that NGD holds a large portion of the ecosystem’s resources, including assets with significant liquidity such as stablecoins and Bitcoin. This creates a situation in which one side of the dispute is fully transparent, while the other controls a large amount of liquid assets that cannot be independently verified. Even if there are legitimate reasons for this structure, the way it is currently presented raises concerns. After reading the report, the overall atmosphere around Neo feels somewhat sad. The market reaction was likely negative because many people realized that this was not a serious transparency document. It reads less like an effort to inform the community and more like an attempt to establish a narrative.

@ngd_neo @Neo_Blockchain Lol @ricklock99 hope to see an update on your treasury board soon!

We are releasing the @Neo_Blockchain Financial Report & Insights for Fiscal Year 2025. The report covers Neo’s financial status from inception to present, including our investment summary, asset management, expenditures, and the restructuring plan for Neo’s next phase.

@lockyer83 @Neo_Blockchain

For almost a decade, $NEO has been setting the standard From the very first project to use a dual token model and pioneers of the dBFT consensus mechanism copied by many inc Binance, @Neo_Blockchain has not only survived cycle after cycle, its thrived.

@lockyer83 @Neo_Blockchain

The gold standard - $NEO @Neo_Blockchain

@ventry089 Can be me, but your explanation is just word soup.

A former quantum from Jump Trading sent me the source code of the bot he said they fired him for running it from the work server when i opened the code i didn’t sleep til 4 am gist of the code: bot holds two websocket connections simultaneously direct feed from Binance spot orderbook and Polymarket CLOB API BTC price on Binance updates ~200ms polymarket recalculates contracts with 3-7s lag in this window bot calculates implied probability compares spot divergence with contract price over 8% - enters btc does +0.4% on spot up contract at 53¢ model probability - 87% bot buys in 5 mins contract resolves at $1 20-50% per trade 100+ times a day $284,719 per month off $1,300 bankroll this isn’t prediction it’s latency arb between CEX and prediction market no need for $50k colocation $20 vps and clean code suffices

@erikzhang Lol nobody asked for this 🤷

As part of the NEO 4 staking design discussion, we’d like community input on the maximum fixed staking duration. What do you think is a reasonable longest fixed staking period?

@snakey_rob And sad 🥲

@getschrutebucks It's ridiculous how accurate that is 😅

Current state of NEO founders - youtu.be/EmFHZxcX6nc?si…

@ricklock99 Imagine you can set multi year goals in 2.5 hours with a select group of people without listening to input from the community. 🙃

Alright guys Neo is dead. Time to sell the remaining coins 😂

@lockyer83 @dahongfei Correct me if I am wrong, buf the info is not from the founders, but assumptions from the community.

@getschrutebucks @dahongfei There is a post about the exchange listings. We have some info on why neo isnt listed on coinbase and how it could be resolved. kraken possibly seems to be in the works. Stablecoins and exchange listings , if pulled off are a great move.

Things are moving fast at $NEO as founder @dahongfei gives a major update " The immediate target is deploying emerging stablecoins like USDT0 and USD1, paving the way for ubiquitous liquidity via USDT and USDC "