@Karpatkey given your lack of reply on conflict of interest and employee bot accounts, we ran some numbers for you pro-bono.
If you ever needed a case study in DAO governance capture, GIP-143 has helpfully generated the dataset. Raw data: [ { "username": "0x6f2", "vote": "In Favour", "days_visited": - Pastebin.com
Some stats:
- Users with zero activity on the forum → 61.9% vote Against termination
- Users with at least 1 post on the forum → 60.7% vote In Favour of termination
Even the “users with activity” bucket includes Karpatkey employees — who are literally voting on their own firing.
In any normal governance system, that would be called a catastrophic conflict of interest. In DAO governance, it’s called Wednesday.
The Math of Capture
- Total Against votes: 24
- At least 18 of those come from KPK employees
- So 75% of the support for KPK… is KPK
That’s not a voter base; that’s a headcount.
Once you strip away the employees voting on their own KPIs, the vote looks very different:
Among independent users who have actually posted, read, and engaged, support for terminating KPK isn’t just a majority — it’s overwhelming.
The only bloc voting “Against” is the bloc whose pay depends on the outcome.
The vote if we remove the obvious kpk employees (likely the new accounts are also kpk employees, but let’s give them the benefit of the doubt):
GIP-143 doesn’t show a divided community. It shows a clear consensus from independent participants: “Terminate Karpatkey.”