Seven Questions for Movement: In the face of facts, please respond positively to community concerns Under the continuous questioning and condemnation in the community, the Movement project has yet to take any substantive action, only using vague language such as "as soon as possible" and "hoping as soon as possible" to appease the community. However, facts speak louder than promises. Before any greater anger erupts, we hope to express the concerns of the community in a rational and objective manner, while strongly urging the project team to respond openly, transparently, and truthfully to the following six core issues: _____________________________________ 1、 Why has the promised airdrop significantly decreased? According to the public information provided by the project party, the initial promise was to release 10% of the airdrop, but the actual payout ratio was less than 1% in the end. On chain data shows that over 90% of qualified wallets have not received any airdrops. Does this result mean that your promise was a lie from the beginning? Have you intentionally exaggerated the scale of airdrops and misled users into participating? How can the project team explain this serious breach of commitment to the community? Movement actual collection only 0.6% verified address: https://(dune.com)/zzzzt/move-airdrop-tracking 2、 Why is the airdrop collection time much lower than the industry average? The initial opening time is 19.35 on December 9th, and normal collection starts from 20.30. After 8:00 am on December 10th, there will be a sudden increase in gas fees to collect. On December 10th, the collection will be closed at 10am!, On December 10th at 5pm, you can only receive a 10% discount from the ETH mainnet! Forcing users to wait for the main network. In the case where only 10% can be claimed, the project party's mouse warehouse address is still being crazily claimed for tens of thousands of dollars: 👉 Evidence Link The airdrop claim window set by Movement is only 10 hours, which is far below the normal level compared to the industry's common days to weeks of claim time. What is the basis for establishing this time window? Have uncontrollable factors such as time zone differences and network congestion among global users been fully considered? Is there any intentional shortening of the collection time to reduce the actual airdrop shares issued, in order to leave the tokens for internal personnel or engage in other improper operations? _____________________________________ 3、 Why did the project team repeatedly delay the launch and arbitrarily change the rules? According to official announcement records: On January 15th, it was announced that it would soon be launched, but it has not been redeemed, causing the coin price to drop by more than 14%. On February 9th, it was announced again that it was preparing for launch and promised to complete it in February, but the ticket was delayed again and the coin price dropped by another 3%. On March 10th, it was announced that it would be launched in "up to two weeks" and a new roadmap was released, causing the coin price to drop by 37%. Announced another extension at the end of March, citing the reason of "after completing the second phase of activities". Such repeated delays and arbitrary rule changes have led to a continuous decline in market confidence. Is this a deliberate deception by the project team, or does it mean that your technical strength is simply unable to support the implementation of the project? If it is not fraudulent behavior, is the project party willing to disclose detailed progress reports to prove the reasonableness of the delay? _____________________________________ 4、 Why does the project team sell a large number of tokens through OTC? Before the airdrop is officially collected, the token has been transferred to an OTC market maker at the following address: 0xaAB6ca7781Dba195AcD5e997c38b2294f5B8803a 0x12800aa2e1d276760DE3C29736184B9729B1327A 0xC07d39dCc914DB4AD2731FD11d09D41DB380230e 0xb6709bbad79135F0D8A5EA6C9AaAd7170Eae2bF8 On chain data shows that since the end of 2023, more than $100 million worth of tokens have been traded OTC through 17 associated wallets, with a significant portion occurring in airdrop withdrawals of less than 1%. What are the sources of these tokens? Is it the unauthorized sale by the project party, rather than normal market circulation? Can the project team disclose all team addresses to ensure that there is no insider trading or malicious selling behavior? _____________________________________ 5、 Why do a large number of new wallets receive airdrops abnormally? The project's mouse warehouse presents various forms (one-on-one, one to many), all of which are new wallets around December 9, 2024, with Binance as the main counterparty bybit， The process roughly involves the exchange receiving funds, transferring them, and selling them Partial new wallet feature addresses: 0x27f00209aa51074E7089Cd9fE5EF62cd69e6A2Fb 0xfAf5E08208B27aF6643CdBe711780EB3af657D67 0x64c326De2A520C42cB99f2C41891C343be324AC1 0x2850D1b686561b7f4d3efEB05Db44910aA2Ce965 0x62e30ff4feb3728260e1f9f9ddf070b83a2b8944 0xb45bf2a2092bc9f4942148a4fa1222ffa345e342 One to many transfer wallet address: 0x0d62c805bccd072baa018ff8a3b658eda84d82db 0xB656b0a6276432B34e2858F5Eb8b6224d6149EF9 0xD7f4a22Da47218F68Eb012833fa20bFfC762265e During the airdrop collection period, on chain data shows: Over 400 new wallets have received airdrops far beyond the normal range; Most of these wallets come from the same IP cluster and quickly sell within three minutes of receiving them; Some new wallets did not pay any gas fees when receiving airdrops, suggesting the existence of a special channel. Does this series of abnormal data indicate the existence of interest transfer and "rat traps" within the project party? Are the ownership of these wallets related to the project team? Is the project party willing to provide on chain data to demonstrate fairness and transparency in the distribution process? _____________________________________ 6、 Why do frequent technical failures occur in cross chain bridges, leading to forced locking of user assets? Since December 2024, Movement's cross chain bridge has experienced multiple serious technical failures The withdrawal function has been disabled, resulting in one-way entry of user funds and inability to withdraw them; Currently, over $40 million in funds have been locked in and users have no way to retrieve them; 97% of cross chain transactions are one-way transfers, and the project party has not provided any solution so far. Is this a technical issue or is it intentional by the project team? If it is a technical issue, can a detailed repair progress and timeline be disclosed? If it is not a technical issue, does the project party admit to disguised misappropriation of user assets and is it suspected of illegal possession? _____________________________________ 7、 Why does the project team still dare not respond directly to community doubts? During all the aforementioned issues, the attitude of the project team remained silent, evasive, and procrastinating. The operation team not only did not publicly respond, but even banned the community multiple times; The reasonable questions raised by the community were either perfunctory or avoided by the project team, and no substantive answers were provided. Does this behavior of avoiding responsibility and refusing communication prove that the project party itself lacks integrity and attempts to cover up the problem? Is the project party willing to hold an X Space/AMA or issue a formal announcement to respond to the community's reasonable questions one by one? If the project party continues to remain silent, does it mean that the authenticity of the above issues is assumed? What we need is the truth, not procrastination!! All doubts raised by the Movement community are based on objective facts from on chain data and official announcements, rather than groundless speculation. Faced with these issues, the community needs clear and transparent explanations, rather than meaningless excuses such as "hope" and "as soon as possible". We solemnly request the project team to respond positively to the six core issues of the community, take practical actions, and not continue to be perfunctory or evasive! If you still choose to remain silent, then the community will use its own way to show the truth of the Movement project to the entire industry!