Army Veteran đŞ - đž Head
United States
Joined December 2021
- Tweets2.1K
- Following354
- Followers746
- Likes4.9K
I would love nothing more than for the internal server to be released to the public without deleting and hiding folders and conversations. I would also love for all emails to be released. Emails between the "interim committee" and emails between myself and Sam. Release the files, release the internal server, release the internal chats that are (perhaps were) on the public server, release the documents, release the emails, release it all. Let everyone see.
Trustee, ReleaseTheFiles
CEDAR DAO OFFICIAL SOCIAL CHANNELS RESTORED
We are pleased to confirm that the official Cedar DAO Telegram and Discord are now back under the administration of longstanding and trusted members of the community team who managed these channels throughout the EverGrow years.
⢠Since the launch of Cedar DAO, our social channels came under the control of a single individual without any recognised authority or mandate to assume that control, contrary to the community-led spirit upon which Cedar was established.
⢠During this period, strong concerns were raised by the community regarding the use of the channels in ways contrary to the interests of Cedar holders. Longstanding supporters were muted or removed, while parties openly hostile to the project were allowed to remain active and exert significant influence over the community discussion.
⢠Both the Telegram and Discord have now been fully archived, preserving a complete record of this period should it be required for future scrutiny.
⢠We would particularly like to thank Discord for their assistance in restoring the Discord server to community administration, following a period in which control of this community-owned asset was being withheld by an individual without a clear community mandate.
⢠The trusteeship does not intend to have any ongoing role in the day-to-day moderation of either channel. Our objective was to secure the channels and return them to trusted members of the community as quickly as possible.
That objective has now been achieved.
The Cedar community has its socials back.
The entire Discord server to include the internal team server should be published for public consumption from the very beginning to present. I endorse this. Release the files, all of the years, no selective edits, 100% of it. I triple dog dare you...
CEDAR DAO OFFICIAL SOCIAL CHANNELS RESTORED
We are pleased to confirm that the official Cedar DAO Telegram and Discord are now back under the administration of longstanding and trusted members of the community team who managed these channels throughout the EverGrow years.
⢠Since the launch of Cedar DAO, our social channels came under the control of a single individual without any recognised authority or mandate to assume that control, contrary to the community-led spirit upon which Cedar was established.
⢠During this period, strong concerns were raised by the community regarding the use of the channels in ways contrary to the interests of Cedar holders. Longstanding supporters were muted or removed, while parties openly hostile to the project were allowed to remain active and exert significant influence over the community discussion.
⢠Both the Telegram and Discord have now been fully archived, preserving a complete record of this period should it be required for future scrutiny.
⢠We would particularly like to thank Discord for their assistance in restoring the Discord server to community administration, following a period in which control of this community-owned asset was being withheld by an individual without a clear community mandate.
⢠The trusteeship does not intend to have any ongoing role in the day-to-day moderation of either channel. Our objective was to secure the channels and return them to trusted members of the community as quickly as possible.
That objective has now been achieved.
The Cedar community has its socials back.
Shawnte V. Thompson retweeted
Hi Ant, after responding here I am going to mute myself from socials regarding the subject matter of all of this for a few days.
I agree, most business owners say âwe.â I do the same.Â
But thatâs exactly the point, using âweâ is not a clear or sufficient way to disclose personal ownership of assets, especially where those assets were publicly represented for years after this tweet as team/project-related and community owned...
If that tweet is being relied on as the sole disclosure that Sam privately owns the founder tokens, team tokens, and that he privately owned EverGrow via a private company that he created and privately owned all alone, then it should have been stated plainly and unambiguously stated, not implied through general language that can reasonably be interpreted as referring to the community's company "our company".
I own my company by myself and I don't refer to it as our company. I say, "the company" or "my company". I've never referred to Brigadier Construction Services (thanks Steve, Nick, and Sam for doxxing me) as "our company". Never because I am the 100% owner...
Something along the lines of, âI personally own these assets through my private company, they are not community-owned, the LP and the token belongs to the community and I own the assets to include all of the taxes that is sitting in all of the wallets...â
That level of clarity matters when youâre talking about control, treasury characterization, and voting power.
Especially given the volume of public statements, posts, replies, comments, audio clips, and videos that you authored and said for years after the tweet.Â
Communications that framed those wallets as team/project-related and communications that framed EGC as the community's Project, and communications that framed Atlas Wallet as the community's wallet...
This isnât about whether people say âwe.â Itâs about whether a reasonable holder would have understood, clearly and at the time, that these assets were privately owned and so from that point forward they were aware that if they bought anymore or bought for the first time that they were buying into a private project and that their taxes were going to an individual that could do whatever they desired with the funds because they belonged to him.
đŤĄ
Still only people that @SamCKx follows can reply. He doesn't follow anyone that doesn't agree with him. He unfollowed me a few weeks ago so that I can't respond to his bullshit.
Yes, Sam is just a holder CedarFam. He never owned Cedar, that's what he has told us. So many times, so many places, in so many spaces đ But now the story has changedđ¤
And today he says that he told us at launch that he owned Cedar. đ˛But he recently has been saying that he told us in 2022 𼴠Guess what Fam, he didn't tell you first. I told you first in November/December of last year which was 2025 and not 2022... đ¤
If you are a Cedar DAO token holder, then let me say this to you:
I am a Cedar DAO token holder. Our goals are 100% aligned.
I quit my job and have dedicated almost 5 years of my life to this project and community.
It has been the most toxic, damaging and stressful experience of my life.
I entered this project with a great career and a 20 year record of excellence and success in business; an impeccable reputation.
If Atlas/Cedar fails, that's my entire legacy destroyed and years of my life wasted.
There is a concerted campaign right now to drive a wedge between us holders. To try to make you believe that I can somehow personally benefit from all this at the cost of other holders. That simply does not hold up to scrutiny. It is a logical fallacy. If we fail, we fail together. If we succeed, this becomes one of the most remarkable stories in DeFi.
Right now, the most important thing we can do is stand firm. The external toxicity we have dealt with for so long has now seeped inside, and it is more dangerous than ever.
The only way we get through this is together. We stay united, and we keep moving forward.
We are Cedar.
Uh oh... @SamCKx thanks. Thanks for acknowledging that you didn't tell us about all of this privately held shit in 2022... Yep, the Cedar launch and YOU didn't tell the community anything about OWNERSHIP openly from launch...
Instead, a committee member copied and pasted your internal message about FOUNDER AND TEAM TOKENS that you have decided that you privately hold. I told the community sometime in November/December of last year that you are now saying you owned EGC privately not YOU and not at launch. Get your stories together Sam Kelly.
Respectfully,
Shawnte V. Thompson
Let's breakdown Sam's 3 points in 3 comments below. Ignore the 4th, he now realizes that I was speaking accurately.
See below:
Shawnte's MO is always the same. She writes posts like this laced with countless misrepresentations and lies, then it gets retweeted and liked by the 15 or so anonymous accounts who have hated our community for years, and it makes her feel like she got a win. So let's go through this:
1) Absolutely LOADS of early stage startups issue non-voting shares. I am literally in an M&A situation right now with one of my companies I am a VC for, where ALL our shares are non-voting apart from the CEO. This is very normal for early stage startups. Even more typical for crowd-funded companies, whose holders almost never have voting rights. This is not intended to hurt the company, it's intended to benefit ALL shareholders. Shawnte thinks if she just says stuff, even if it's untrue, enough people will believe it.
2) If you listen to the Spaces, rather than Shawnte, you will hear that we openly discussed the timing of the funding - I need financial records for Atlas, officially under the company, to prove efficient financial management to prospective VCS. I have 1 year of those now. Ideally I would have more.
3) Are we asking VCs to invest in the DAO?! No we are not. We are asking them to invest in a tech company, where if you guys had voting shares, you would control every single vote. A group of anonymous people controlling the governance of a company we will be asking VCs to invest millions in. Utterly unrealistic. I know this world, I am part of it, and I would never touch a company at an early stage knowing I had effectively zero voting rights - the DAO would have total control over every vote. Look how much Shawnte is objecting to knowing I have a few percent in voting rights over Cedar - she is saying that is highly damaging for you all and that with that modest percent I can control votes - how does she reconcile that contradiction?
4) Look at the way she openly lies to you all - where on earth does she get a "$600k salary" from? Who is getting paid $600k? She just says stuff, she knows it's a lie (she previously said I somehow own 25% of Cedar!!!). She just makes stuff up to mislead you all and she doesn't give a damn. Then she says I am the one full of poopy?! Lol
Anyway, back to my day.
2) Thatâs revisionist. There was no clear timeline communicated. There was no statement that this would take multiple years to build a financial track record before pursuing VC. What was communicated was forward momentum toward funding and launch.
Weâre now over a year removed from those statements. The beta has been offline for roughly seven months. Those are objective facts.
If the position is now âthis always required more time and more records,â then that should have been stated clearly at the time. It wasnât.
Instead, what weâre seeing is a pattern of explanations being introduced after the fact to reconcile outcomes that donât align with how this was originally framed.
We also did not pass the March 2025 proposal under the assumption that a year later the beta would be offline. The expectation at the time was that we were supporting something much closer to launch, not an indefinite timeline with shifting requirements.
At what point does the community have to ask whether it invested in something that is not being delivered as represented?
And what is a reasonable timeframe to expect a functional product before questions around capital use and accountability become unavoidable?
Especially when the narrative appears to have shifted from âwe just need a bank account to demonstrate capital to VCsâ to now requiring extended periods of financial track records.
Letâs get specific:
- When is the beta going back online?
- What concrete milestones need to be met before that happens?
- What is the actual, current timeline, not implied, not retrospective, but stated plainly?
Because at this point, itâs not unreasonable for the community to expect clarity. Reframing prior statements after the fact doesnât build confidence, it raises questions about whether expectations were ever accurately set in the first place
3) Thatâs another mischaracterization...
I did not say VCs âinvest in DAOs.â I said there are examples of VCs investing in structures where DAOs are involved, which is materially different. The point was that DAO participation and VC investment are not mutually exclusive.
Governance can be structured appropriately. No one is arguing that a DAO should control every single vote. Iâve explicitly stated the opposite, governance can be shared and structured in a way that accommodates both investors and the DAO.
What doesnât make sense is the standard youâre applying.
Youâre saying no serious investor would deploy capital into a structure where they have effectively zero voting rights, yet that is exactly the position the DAO was put in by you and you alone haha.
- The DAO deployed essentially all of its capital.Â
- The DAO has no meaningful governance rights at the company level.
- The DAO has no board representation.
- The DAO has no visibility into how funds have been used past seeing our funds get off ramped to the same Binance account that you off ramped to in your Chairman of EverGrow days yet you say that you have a Wallet Enterprises business account. Sounds like you have made yourself the business...
You canât argue that this structure is âutterly unrealisticâ for VCs while simultaneously expecting the DAO to accept those exact terms. Stop pissing on us.
Thatâs the contradiction. We are tired of your contradictions that you think we should forget when you delete your posts.
And the âanonymous DAOâ point doesnât hold here either. The DAO is represented through a Foundation with a named Director that you've been trying to get your hands on for the longest so that you can start threatening him and see about discrediting him. He is a legal professional that is fully capable of participating in governance structures, including board level interaction alongside VCs.Â
This is standard in many setups where decentralized communities interface with traditional entities.
As for the comparison youâre trying to draw thereâs a fundamental difference between:
- A disclosed, quantified percentage of voting power within a known governance system
VS
- The complete absence of defined governance rights, oversight, and accountability after capital has been deployed.
Those are not remotely the same thing.
So the issue isnât whether governance should be structured. The issue is that the DAO was asked to commit significant capital under one set of expectations, and is now being told that having any meaningful governance role at all is âunrealistic.â
That doesnât reconcile like most things that you've been saying since last year. Make it make sense.
Is Sam Kelly really going to continue to lie to the CedarDAO community that he didn't author a written proposal not calling the committee interim and pretend as though the written words on his self authored proposal do not supercede his other references?
Yes, I have been honest in that I was the Sam fan amongst others that never bothered to perform my own due diligence and just went with whatever Sam said and so yes, I hooked on to the word interim like everyone else did and continues to do. Then I decided to read the proposal and compare it to the one before that he had to scrap. They are vastly different. Period point blank.
Is he not going to tell you all that's he's already posted about this and that I replied to this?
Unfortunately for Sam and fortunate for us, Sam is not the intellect that he lead us all to believe that he is and Sam is of the belief that the language in a written proposal is superceded by everything else. He is of the belief that he understands the law better than legal professionals and he has still yet to have his attorney reach out to the DAO's attorney. He believes himself so intelligent that he doesn't need an attorney and that between his lies, his followers, and them all doxxing me that I will take Sam up on his deal and resign with grace via a full public statement in support of my efforts and to top it off Sam will enter into a non disagreement agreement with me. Sure Sam, where do I sign đ and thank you for being so gracious đđź
xitter.cf/i/status/2042548256228âŚ
Here, read this first paragraph @SamCKx :
xitter.cf/i/status/2042548256228âŚ
Shawnte V. Thompson retweeted
Yep! That "interim measure" committee vote that you ran on this same day of these screenshots that you pulled offline because of the outpour of community members that didn't like you hand picking your committee filled with OG staffers that would do whatever you say how you say that are still trying behind the scenes to obstruct on your behalf....
Now look to the 2nd proposal where there was a vote. Not one use of the word "interim". Not one.
Post the link, nevermind, here ya go: snapshot.box/#/s:evergrow-luâŚ
Sam... it's looking like you potentially stole 78.9M Cedar tokens from your beloved community.
You should put our minds at ease and at least prove your alleged personal ownership and then we will just have to focus on the failure to disclose and the representations made since 2022 because all of your words since then do matter and are admissible in the very court of law that you have a habitual habit of talking about.
You owe us at least this, let's be frank...
With this, I bid you a good night and a good rest of the week.
Can't reply to you either @PaulTreffx either your lying or ignorant and no one else besides you two is going to come out publicly in support of what you are saying. No one...
It's in writing, Paul. Perhaps this is your attempt to put some space between yourself and all of this seeing as though we have anonymous sources one of which could be you and I'm just playing this game with you to protect your identity...
You go and chill somewhere and work on getting that thing released back from X prison and pump it to 1B. Rooting for you.
Sam I think is a big boy, got himself into this before you came along and remains in it after you've sold, been MIA, and have returned with your popcorn and a new token.
This needs not involve you but if you want to put yourself in the middle of this feel free. If there is ever litigation I'm sure it can involve you as well.
Let me provide everyone with an example of how us three knew these were Sam's tokens:
When bonus time came, Sam determined what Cody, Rocket, and I got. We would always say "Thank you, because he owned them. Then he would say to us, "you three figure out many tokens the staff members should get based on what you guys got" It was this way b/c we work closer with everyone and knew who deserved what plus it was more fair. Us three would sit around and talk about this and always try and get the staff as much as possible. We knew that he paid for these so he wasn't going to just throw tokens around however, he was very fair. I talked with the guys about Sam owning the tokens but he used them as "Team wallets" for anything EGC related that required tokens.
Being last compensated genius. That means anyone not named that was being compensated would no longer be compensated which means all of the TG guys outside of Marios and Nikola that stopped getting paid.... None of those was me. I think you had worked with one or two of those guys recently for calling them servants or something no?? The last time you joined TG and got shut down yet again đđ¤đđ¤
Only the Samarmy guys will push this one....
Don't you have some kind of elite education or something??
Shawnte V. Thompson retweeted
@SamCKx why do you think the person on the committee at the time copied and pasted your words and never spoke on it again? Were they by chance one of your last committee members that was speechless when you decided to say that you owned the tokens days before launch and they thought what everyone else thought for years that they belonged to the Project?? đ¤ Why do you think that the committee didn't speak on this?? The committee sure showed support and said that they knew this all along huh đ¤
Shawnte V. Thompson retweeted
Heyyyy, a copy and paste of your words internally to the incoming acting committee!!
Would've been awesome had you disclosed these things to the community yourself back in 2022 instead of leaving it to the incoming committee 3 years later
We would t even be in this predicament had you done this years ago đ