Conversation

3) We talked, and I gave what I saw as the major feedback the community (and I) had: a) the plan is shit for SAFE holders; it massively dilutes them down b) the plan was drafted and announced without getting any feedback from the outside world
2
13
4) They were receptive to it. I said, basically, that it didn't need tweaks -- it needed a total overhaul. I suggested a few variants that I felt would be reasonable.
2
10
5) They are discussing. They say they'll release a new proposal for COVER tokenomics soon which takes this into account. Until then, I'm reserving judgement.
2
10
6) To be clear: --I was listed as an advisor for COVER --until today I was not asked for advice on anything --until today I had no input on what was done --today, they asked for my advice --we'll see if they take it --I'm not paid anything as an advisor
4
20
7) If there is not a new proposal, or there is one but it doesn't fairly represent token holders, then I will formally withdraw as an advisor to them. I might either way. Hopefully there will be one, and it will be good. We'll see.
3
19
8) And no matter what: --NOT INVESTMENT ADVICE --I have no idea what the price of COVER should be. Maybe it's way too high, idk, I literally haven't thought about it. --DO NOT BUY COVER BASED ON WHAT I SAY. I'm just trying to help.
5
16
9) I don't personally find myself all that excited by the COVER protocol. I could be wrong! But in addition to not being an endorsement of the token or team, it's not one of the project.
3
19
This Tweet is from a suspended account. Learn more
Show replies