The gentry donates first, the common people donate later; after the matter is accomplished, the gentry's money is returned in full, while the common people's money is split three to seven?

If the principal of 1800 BTC is threatened, it is a dual issue of morality and law, and there is no need to seek rights protection on Twitter; the best way is to call the police.

If one party fails to deliver on their promises and unilaterally breaches the contract without informing others, it is a matter of integrity. Without a foundation of integrity, there is no foundation at all, and such behavior should be resisted.

However, if it is an issue of collusion between large holders and the project, leading to dissatisfaction due to uneven distribution, it should be resolved privately. I hope that people do not exploit traffic or the emotions of others to help themselves; that is very inappropriate!

If there is a real basis for rights protection, it is simple—

Just present the facts, clarify what exactly happened, and where the grievances lie. What are you seeking rights protection for? What are your losses? Is there any evidence to prove it?

The public's eyes are sharp; I believe that most people in the WEB3 community outside the walls are still aware. Just boldly present the facts, unless the facts themselves involve some conspiracy, in which case it is another matter!

Regardless of how this event develops, I am not concerned, but I am very interested in some intriguing lines that have emerged—

1) The gentry donates first, the common people donate later. After the matter is accomplished, the gentry's money is returned in full, while the common people's money is split three to seven.

Large holders can occupy a share in TVL, but Bitcoin is still in their hands, so how much of the Bitcoin protocol is real? Is it only people like me, the retail investors, who truly hold Bitcoin, while the rest are just fake data?

2) If TVL is generated this way, why would the project itself engage in such behavior? Can I consider such actions inherently dishonest? Are such behaviors an exception in the industry, or are they widely known?

3) Do these operations violate certain laws or ethical standards?

Regardless of the country, from a legal perspective, if the project party manipulates or falsely reports TVL data without clear disclosure, it may involve fraud or false statements, violating financial regulatory laws. Ethically, such behavior clearly contradicts the principles of transparency, fairness, and integrity, leading to a loss of community trust and affecting the healthy development of the entire ecosystem.

So, as a large staker, I find myself wondering if I thought I was an industry BUILDER, but in reality, I might just be a big retail investor?

A call from us retail investors:

With Ethereum transitioning to POS and the rise of BTCFI, staking is an unavoidable and very important topic.

The staking of BTC and ETH plays a crucial supporting role in the network's security, economic structure, degree of decentralization, and the participation of the investor community. By incentivizing users to stake their assets, these networks not only enhance their own stability and security but also provide stakers with a new way to earn investment returns, potentially releasing hundreds of billions of dollars into the Bitcoin market.

I sincerely hope that this ecosystem can grow healthily and that similar incidents do not occur to undermine our confidence!

I truly hope!

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。