dreamer61

[dreamer61 @dreamcryptowd]

@reya_xyz @oguzgibibiri I think it is not the right time to release Reya tokens. We should be waiting for the BTC to reach $100k.

[dreamer61 @dreamcryptowd]

@teaprotocol When and where can I recieve TEA tokens that I was distributed in the coinlist ICO?

[dreamer61 @dreamcryptowd]

@reya_xyz When can I receive $REYA that I was distributed from the COINLIST ICO.

[dreamer61 @dreamcryptowd]

@CoinWingsIO @worldlibertyfi @EricTrump @ZachWitkoff You should vote "no".

[dreamer61 @dreamcryptowd]

I just voted "NO" on "Proposal: Early Supporter & Founder/Team/Partner Token Unlock" https://t.co/acqxZQPFWJ #https://vote.worldlibertyfinancial.com/

[dreamer61 @dreamcryptowd]

I just voted "NO" on "Proposal: Early Supporter & Founder/Team/Partner Token Unlock" https://t.co/acqxZQPFWJ #https://vote.worldlibertyfinancial.com/

[dreamer61 @dreamcryptowd]

@worldlibertyfi I want to reject this proposal even though my tokens will be unlocked permanently.

[dreamer61 @dreamcryptowd]

@justinsuntron Fight Fight Fight!!!

[dreamer61 @dreamcryptowd]

@RMindle97082 정신차리세요

[H.E. Justin Sun 👨‍🚀 🌞 @justinsuntron]

This Is World Tyranny, Not World Liberty Financial — Here's Why

This proposal has been packaged as a "governance alignment signal" and a "long-term commitment," but strip away the packaging and what you have is one of the most absurd governance scams I have ever seen. Let me break it down.

I. Vote Against and Get Punished — Classic Coercion Tactic

This is not a legitimate voting exercise, not even close.  The design of this proposal is a logical trap: anyone who votes against it has their tokens locked indefinitely with no unlock path whatsoever.

In other words, if you oppose this proposal, you get punished. This is not voting. This is coercion. What kind of democratic process rewards agreement and imprisons dissent?

II. Voters Have Been Selectively Frozen Out

I personally hold approximately 4% of the voting power, yet my tokens have been frozen and I am forced out of this voting process.

I am not alone.

A large number of holders with significant voting rights are in the same position. Meanwhile, the team controls the power to freeze tokens — they decide who can vote and who cannot. What does this mean? It means the outcome was determined before the vote even began.

This is not a governance vote. This is a performance where the police have already barricaded the doors of parliament and only let their own people inside to raise their hands. The voter pool has been purged. Only yes votes remain.

The result of such a vote carries no binding force whatsoever.

III. All Actual Power Has Been Seized by Anonymous Actors

The actual control over the WLFI smart contracts lies in the hands of a 3/5 anonymous multisig and a single anonymous guardian EOA has the power to blacklist addresses holding WLFI.

Let me emphasize — anonymous.

This anonymous multisig can override any vote result and execute any operation directly at the contract level. The so-called governance proposals, on-chain votes, and community discussions are nothing but theater. Real power has never been yielded to anyone but themselves and it’s laughable that they try these tricks to fool the community.

The bottom line is this, the power sits with anonymous wallet addresses whose owners nobody knows or can verify. This is not decentralized governance. This is dictatorship wearing the mask of a DAO.

IV. Voters Must Identify Themselves, but the Rulers Are Anonymous — Worse Than Tyranny

Here is the most ironic part: WLFI requires every participating voter to complete identity verification, electronically sign acknowledgements, and meet compliance eligibility requirements. You want to exercise your rights? Show your face first.

But who are the guardian and multisig signers who hold the power of life and death over the contract? Nobody was told and there is absolutely no transparency.  While the governed must identify themselves, the governors with absolute power are anonymous. Your voters must register, submit to scrutiny, and be vetted and dictated how to vote— while your dictators won't even show their faces.

V. A Naked Violation of Property Rights Worth Billions of Dollars

Let us not forget the real stakes of this proposal: this is not some trivial parameter adjustment or protocol upgrade. This vote seeks to decide the unlock schedule for billions of dollars in assets, the reallocation of governance and vesting rights, and most extreme of all, the permanent destruction of billions of tokens. This is a naked expropriation of holders' property rights.

In an environment where voting against the proposal is punished, where large numbers of holders have been frozen out of voting, and where actual control rests with anonymous wallets, using this sham vote to decide the fate of billions of dollars in assets?

This is not governance. This is a sham and flies in the face of what this protocol was meant to be. No society governed by the rule of law would permit this. In traditional financial markets, any asset disposition of this scale would require rigorous regulatory review, independent board approval, and minority shareholder protections.

Here, a few anonymous wallets get to decide everything. The permanent burning of tokens means holders' property is irreversibly destroyed, no compensation, no recourse, no due process. This has gone far beyond the realm of so-called "decentralized governance." This is a systematic violation of property rights.

Conclusion

I repeat that this proposal is not governance. It is an exercise of power by the selected few who are carefully engineering a further power consolidation and property expropriation operation.

Dissenters are punished for voting no. Opponents are frozen out. Actual control lies with anonymous wallets. Those who exercise their rights must prove their identity while the fate of billions of dollars in assets is decided by a sham vote.

This is not what decentralized finance was meant to be, results produced under these sorts of conditions carry no legitimacy, should not have binding force, and should not be recognized.

I call on all WLFI holders to see this proposal for what it truly is, to voice their opposition across all public channels, and to reserve all legal rights of recourse.

[Coin Borsa X @CoinBorsaX]

Locking our funds for another 2–5 years without consent is unacceptable.
We did not agree to this. WLFI is unilaterally restricting access to investors’ own assets.

Burning 4.52B tokens while locking 62.3B doesn’t fix anything it concentrates control and shifts risk onto retail.

This is not strategy. This is abuse of trust.

$WLFI must understand this clearly:
If this decision is not reversed or transparently justified,
we will pursue every legal and regulatory path available.

We will not stay silent. We will not accept this.

#Wlfi #Trumpfamily

[dreamer61 @dreamcryptowd]

@FanMusk39325 A

[dreamer61 @dreamcryptowd]

@isaacrrr7 No

[dreamer61 @dreamcryptowd]

@MS2PZ Trump & Netanyahu

[dreamer61 @dreamcryptowd]

@0IvankaTrumpRV2 0%

[Reya @reya_xyz]

like if you believe that trading is coming back to ethereum

rt if you’ve been been here since day one

[dreamer61 @dreamcryptowd]

@Amaan729 Yes, I'm absolutely agree with you.
I was distributed about 500k Reya tokens from the coinlist ICO, but I don't want for the Reya team to launch their tokens early. I think it is the best time to launch them middle of September this year

[dreamer61 @dreamcryptowd]

@Ravinxweb3 @reya_xyz Yes

[dreamer61 @dreamcryptowd]

@cz_binance But there's also a chance to be rich.

[dreamer61 @dreamcryptowd]

@ShineShadowNews 미친놈