Back to collectionProposal frustration and holder benefits belong to separate exchanges
Kimasu criticised the lack of visible direction in the Vanguard proposal thread, linking it to weak participation. Minutes later, the same author expressed support in a different proposal thread: the request for a direct airdrop to key holders. These were separate interventions, not another person replying in support of the complaint. They show dissatisfaction with communication alongside interest in a specific distribution proposal; neither post records a vote result or approved funding.
Kimasu criticised the lack of visible direction in the Vanguard proposal thread, linking it to weak participation. Minutes later, the same author expressed support in a different proposal thread: the request for a direct airdrop to key holders. These were separate interventions, not another person replying in support of the complaint. They show dissatisfaction with communication alongside interest in a specific distribution proposal; neither post records a vote result or approved funding.
Returning holder pasha_procent separately asked about missed ecosystem distributions and whether keys could be resold. Dhruv cited 4 previous airdrops and stated that the keys were soulbound and could not be sold. That answer distinguished historical benefits from an exit right. It did not establish that this holder had received every distribution or that past claim windows remained open.