Let me clarify several key points:
1.I never boasted about my Fortune 500 experience.
In the discussion at 关于DAO的三点改进提议 - #7 by jm9k,
it was Jordan (jm9k) who repeatedly cited his work experience at Fortune 500 companies while opposing my proposal to ban proxy submissions for DAO projects.
so I merely responded for context — not for self-glorification.
2.Throughout this discussion, I have focused exclusively on proposing rule improvements.
I discussed issues, not people.
3.Palmyra’s failure to deliver, long silence, and lack of accountability are objective facts.
Instead of facing these issues head-on,
you chose deflection, misdirection, and absurd insinuations — such as Neon hinting that somehow I “pocketed” Palmyra’s DAO funds.
If that’s the narrative you prefer, fine, let me “confess” sarcastically:
“Yes, all the Palmyra project funds were stuffed into my pocket.
I didn’t do any work, didn’t deliver anything, and didn’t explain to the community.
Now I hope everyone just forgets about it — OK?”
This is the absurd reality you are trying to manufacture.
4.Even more ironically, you keep claiming they “serve the community,”
yet they systematically ignore Palmyra’s disaster, the flaws of the proxy system, and the broader issue of fund mismanagement.
Can those who truly care about the DAO’s health remain silent about these fundamental problems?
5.True DAO governance means facing issues, not burying them.
True maturity is measured not by how many people “smile and nod,”
but by whether the system can absorb criticism and course-correct when necessary.
Otherwise, all we are building is a new “"The Tragedy of the Commons”,“People’s Commune” — where self-congratulation replaces real accountability.
Finally, let me state clearly:
Real issues deserve real answers.
Genuine suggestions deserve real discussions.
Not collective deflection and convenient ignorance.
首先，我想澄清几点事实：
1.在 关于DAO的三点改进提议 - #7 by jm9k 的讨论中，
正是 Jordan（jm9k）在反对我提出的“禁止代理人申报项目”的提议时，反复引用了他自己在《财富》500 强企业工作的经历。
我才出于必要进行了简要说明。
这不是炫耀，而是回应他们拿“自己背景”当挡箭牌的逻辑。
2.在整个讨论过程中，我始终聚焦在提出规则改进建议。
我讨论的是问题，不是针对个人。
3.Palmyra 项目执行失败、交付缺失、长时间无更新，是客观事实。
面对这些问题，你们没有一个人选择正面回答，
反而各种转移话题、诡辩、甚至试图将责任模糊到提问者身上。
尤其 Neon 的发言，
试图暗示 Palmyra 的资金好像发到了我账户上一样，
这种倒打一耙的手法，本身就是对整个 DAO 讨论氛围的伤害。
既然如此，干脆我来“认领”好了：
“是的，Palmyra 项目的资金都塞到我兜里了。
我没干活，也没做交付，也没向社区解释。
现在我希望大家都忘了这件事，OK？”
你们想要掩盖的荒谬局面，就是这样。
4.更讽刺的是，在讨论中，
你们全部自称“为社区付出”，
却对 Palmyra、对代理制的问题闭口不谈，
对社区资金的失控状况视而不见。
请问，真正关心 DAO 健康的人，会回避这些根本性问题吗？
DAO 的治理，应该是面对问题，解决问题。
而不是靠集体诡辩和沉默来掩盖系统漏洞。
真正成熟的社区，是可以容纳“挑刺者”的。
如果所有人都只想着“你好我好大家好”，那 DAO 就真的变成了新的“公地悲剧”,“人民公社”。
最后，我想强调一句：
有问题就应该直面问题，
有建议就应该认真讨论建议。
而不是靠集体诡辩和无视问题，来掩盖系统性漏洞。