sailor1

I appreciate you taking the time to articulate these concerns, and I think some of the criticism is fair. I want to provide some context without dismissing the frustration. Regarding stablecoins, the majority of the delays have unfortunately been outside our control. There have been things we’ve needed to address during testing, and I take responsibility for those, but most of the waiting has been on third parties. We’ve encountered repeated delays as external providers work through their own processes and requirements. Most notably, we received explicit confirmation that we could proceed with our announcement, only for that position to change hours afterward when the provider placed production approval on hold for an additional compliance review. We’re ultimately dependent on their timelines and decisions, regardless of how prepared we are internally. That dependency is precisely why we’re building an architecture that allows multiple service providers to support the same functionality, reducing our reliance on any single party. I understand that this doesn’t make the delays any less frustrating, but I think it’s important to distinguish between a lack of execution on our part and circumstances outside our control. We can certainly improve how we communicate timelines and dependencies, and I take responsibility for that. Regarding the security incident, I personally made the decision to communicate through our Discord announcements channel and my X account. Given that the community wanted to hear directly from me, we believed those channels would provide sufficient visibility and accountability. In hindsight, there’s certainly room to improve how broadly we communicate important events. I’m proud of how quickly our team identified, contained, and addressed the incident, but that doesn’t mean our communication couldn’t have been better. On Discord, finding the right balance has been challenging. We have people understandably frustrated by market movements that are outside our control, people raising legitimate questions and constructive criticism, and others whose intentions are less productive. Distinguishing between those groups consistently isn’t always easy, and I recognize that we haven’t necessarily gotten every decision right. Legitimate questions and respectful criticism should always be welcome, even when they’re uncomfortable. Ultimately, I take responsibility for the decisions we make as a company, including where we fall short. At the same time, I want to be transparent about the distinction between things we can control and things we cannot. We’re building infrastructure that depends on regulated financial institutions and external providers, and that comes with challenges that aren’t always visible from the outside. I appreciate the feedback, genuinely. We can always find ways to improve, and I’m committed to doing that while continuing to build and deliver on what we’ve set out to accomplish.

As discussed during our weekly team call today, we’ve built nearly all the pieces of the puzzle. Now it’s time to connect them and unlock the full range of functionality and capabilities that we, along with several external parties, have known for some time our technology is capable of delivering.