Pretty confusing why no one is allowed to discuss the elephant in the room. The one leading to mass holder and developer exodus. The one that keeps Polkadot in people’s mouth for a negative reasons not positive ones. The one that gets me laughed at when I try and get other crypto people into Polkadot.
When will leadership start discussing the things holders clearly care very strongly about and open this forum to all forms of Polkadot discussion, not only the ones they deem appropriate?
I’ve been a holder/staker since 2021 and really feel nothing other than disgust towards it now. The smugness from those in paid positions is beyond comprehension to me, all of which openly say they hold little DOT. Long term support shouldn’t merit feelings of being used.
Hearing stuff like JAM has a jacuzzi on it, Kus making $1.1M per year, Gavin flys private, and other extravagant spending rubs salt in many wounds formed through trust and let down time and time again.
Change is needed. Discuss change and make change. More of the same leadership is going to tank Polkadot for good and I mean that as someone who loved it.
My therapist agrees, as seen in the images attached. This is the current public perception of Polkadot. I don’t want to get laughed at for promoting Polkadot but I do frequently and seemingly deservingly.
You’re spot on. Unfortunately they won’t change because they’re getting paid to not do so. All you really can do is short the hell out of it and hope that every last of them loses his job.
I am not sure what you are suggesting should be done differently, but speaking for myself, I am always open for feedback and suggestions.
“The smugness from those in paid positions is beyond comprehension to me, all of which openly say they hold little DOT.”
Everyone in a paid position in the ecosystem say they hold little DOT? I am an employee of W3F and I haven’t done this. In fact, I can’t remember every having seen any instances of this. Can you share some?
I believe you raise a valid point in your criticism regarding Polkadot’s lack of a clear vision and accountability.
The yearly costs vastly exceed the network’s income, and even with the recent increase in core time pricing, there remains a huge gap between costs and revenue. This is clearly unsustainable.
My impression is that many participants in the space have quietly accepted this reality, continuing with “business as usual” while implicitly acknowledging that the funds will eventually be depleted.
I also believe it’s important to talk about that which must not be discussed here.
Nobody wants to back a loser - which is why PolkadotFollower was ridiculed for merely suggesting that people give DOT a try.
Sure, this also centers around staff that are already paid to be part of Polkadot making extra money through Kaito rewards which they personally voted for through OpenGov.
Polkadot head of community Phunky revealed he only holds less than $9,000 in DOT and in a since deleted post was very public about selling his DOT winnings ($7,700~) from the Kaito leaderboard for USDC or BTC on Hydration. Phunky is paid by Polkadot and was additionally paid through Kaito for completing the responsibilities of his job.
Leemo is paid to be part of Polkadot yet is actively participating in Kaito making 2 streams of income. 1 for doing his job and 2 for doing his job that was already paid for, posting Polkadot. I don’t know why these people that are already paid need further incentives to post Polkadot. Especially when it is them that vote for the spend with extra power handed to them from Web3Foundation. The few times he posts his wallet I see a lot more hydration in it than DOT.
Lolmcshizz frequently shows he holds very little DOT by suggesting Polkadot Dca ETH, BTC, and USDC with treasury DOT while DOT is at all time low and these assets are not. These are not suggestions of a Polkadot holder, they’re suggestions that make DOT holders extremely unhappy as seen by the comments.
Giotto was very open about selling his DOT position and he was closely involved with Polkadot since its golden era. The needle hasn’t moved nearly at all since 2 months ago when he announced his sell giving credence to his position.
I’ll edit with more if I have time.
I’ll wrap up by saying I have never seen anyone from the paid Polkadot staff show off their DOT or any large significant holding. They’re all for BTC and other coins like Hydration but DOT is thrown to the side. Now there is talk of JAM token which Gavin won’t rule out completely which is like kicking a dead horse of DOT support. If those in the core team aren’t heavily invested in and aggressively investing in DOT I don’t see why the community or public would want to either.
I would not classify any of these people as having “paid positions” to work on Polkadot. To me, this would be a salaried member of the Polkadot Technical Fellowship, an employee of Parity, or an employee of Web3 Foundation.
Phunky is not “Head of Community at Polkadot”. He is head of protocol partnerships for Global Stake, which provides staking services for numerous ecosystems. https://x.com/ThePhunky1
Leemo works for Novasama Technologies. They develop software on Polkadot (like Polkadot Vault and Nova Wallet), but saying he works for Polkadot is like saying I work for Tim Cook because I write software on a MAc. https://x.com/LeemoXD
Similar with lolmcshizz. He is a founder of Hydration, a parachain, and does not work on developing Polkadot itself. https://x.com/lolmcshizz
Giotto bought some DOT tokens and later sold them, according to him. I don’t know what sort of business he runs or if he is employed by anyone, but he certainly never had a paid position working on Polkadot. https://x.com/giottodf
You are more level headed than I. I appreciate you and your response. I just want Polkadot to win.
In other words, Lemo is being funded by the Polkadot treasury.
Additionally, I believe he also serves in some ambassadorial capacity for DOT, doesn’t he?
That might be the disconnect OP was referring to.
I still think OP’s point stands: there appear to be very few genuine advocates - more mercenaries than missionaries - with limited trust (or perhaps just a sober view?) of Polkadot’s future.
This might be the consequence of Open Gov and its limitations.
That is what I am referring to. There is something seriously wrong with staff working to open new avenues of self enrichment when holders of DOT, the community, are pushed to the side and told to look at the long term.
I do not see equal or more value returning to Polkadot from what it spends and that is a very easy thing to fix. All spending that isn’t accruing more value than paid should be burned. Unless DOT becomes deflationary it will continue to rapidly fade from relevance.
You need users to be deflationary and to have users you need a value proposition; financial return or a product service the users need. Polkadot focuses its spending on essentially trapping new holders in an inflationary hellscape that spends to an extreme extent on things like JAM which Gavin admits anyone can copy, improve, and sell for the benefit of holders.
The losers are the people that buy DOT in this ecosystem. It shouldn’t be that way but it is and it will lead to a dead ecosystem with any modicum of long term thought.
There’s no path to sustainability at all, and there is no discussion on how to achieve it.
With a current market cap of around $6 billion and an inflation rate of 8%, Polkadot is currently printing around $500 million per year.
To offset this inflation, assuming 100 cores, each core would need to cost about $400,000 per month. Absolutely insane. Of course, people involved in the ecosystem are fully aware that this is not achievable and act accordingly by dumping their tokens.
