Warning: Is The Pledge Crypto an Innovation or a Dangerous Gamble?
The Pledge, a newly launched cryptocurrency project launched by a group around the photographer and Web3 advocate Rainer Hosch and Mike Hager, has become a hot topic in the crypto world. With its unique token-holding rules and a controversial enforcement mechanism, The Pledge has divided opinions.
What Is The Pledge?
The Pledge is a crypto project designed to create a controlled token economy, where participants are restricted to selling only 1% of their holdings per monthamounting to just 12% per year. This structure locks holders into an 8.5-year commitment.
The project has onboarded 900 participants, each receiving 1 million tokens. These participants were reportedly handpicked by Hosch, who extended private invitations to build the initial community.
Leadership by Rainer Hosch, Mike Hager, and Team Faces Heavy Criticism
Rainer Hosch, widely known for his NFT project "52 Icons," along with Mike Hager and a small group of collaborators, is at the center of significant backlash for their leadership of The Pledge. While the team has presented the project as a "social experiment," critics argue that their repeated focus on financial gains casts doubt on the project's credibility as a genuine social endeavor.
Community members have voiced growing frustration over the teams lack of transparency. Key questions about the projects goals and the ethics behind its strict enforcement mechanisms remain unanswered. Allegedly, Hosch and his co-leaders have avoided addressing these concerns directly, further eroding trust.
Statements made by Hosch and others on X (formerly Twitter) have been called out as "bullshit" by some participants, intensifying the dissatisfaction. Many in the crypto community view their actions as falling short of the accountability expected from leaders, arguing that this group has failed to set a positive example with their approach to the project.
Another X user who is believed behind The Pledge project was seen on Discord scaring people into selling and pushing the "Pledging" narrative, talking about the benefits of NOT selling Pledge tokens.
Behind the technical infrastructure of The Pledge lies the work of DappPunk. While specifics about his contributions are not explicitly detailed, DappPunk is reportedly responsible for the smart contract development that powers the project.
An interesting pattern has emerged among participants: users involved in The Pledge are actively reposting and amplifying each others content on X. This coordinated promotion strongly suggests that the project is a premeditated effort to create hype and maintain a tightly controlled narrative. Such behavior raises concerns about transparency and authenticity, as the orchestrated nature of the posts may mislead outsiders into believing in the organic success of the project.
Community members have expressed frustration with Hoschs lack of transparency. Despite growing concerns, he has allegedly avoided answering key questions raised by the community about the projects goals and enforcement mechanisms. His statements on X (formerly Twitter) have been labeled as "bullshit" by some participants, further fueling discontent.
However, there are also many "Pledgers" who already are pushing The Pledge narrative.
PLEDGE Token Price: Volatile Start
The PLEDGE token experienced an explosive launch, initially shooting up to a peak of $0.04, reaching a market cap high of around $40 million. This hype was driven by intense hype and coordinated promotion from its early participants. However, the momentum was short-lived, as the tokens value plummeted shortly after, crashing to its current price of approximately $0.0053. This dramatic drop has left many questioning the sustainability of the project and the motives behind its orchestrators. The rapid decline highlights the high-risk nature of speculative tokens, especially in projects surrounded by controversy and limited transparency.
PLEDGE price on Uniswap - DEX Screener
Controversial Enforcement Mechanism
The enforcement rules of The Pledge have been a focal point of controversy. Participants who breach the selling agreement reportedly face public shaming, drawing comparisons to the dystopian theme of "The Purge." This punitive approach has been condemned for its ethical implications and potential violation of human dignity. Also. their Discord channel looks very aggressive, enticing people to publicly shame other users.
Transactions and breaches are documented on the blockchain and publicly discussed on X, amplifying the reputational risks for those who fail to comply. Critics argue that this creates a coercive environment where participants are pressured into compliance under fear of public defamation.
Is It Really a Social Experiment?
Rainer Hosch markets The Pledge as a "social experiment," but critics challenge this narrative. They argue that:
- The project revolves around real money and real reputations, making the claim of an "experiment" baseless.
- The ultimate goal appears to be financial gain, as reflected in Hoschs messaging and the projects design.
- The ethical concerns, such as public shaming and coercion, undermine the legitimacy of any experimental claim.
One of the most alarming aspects of The Pledge is its use of on-chain blame lists and public shaming to coerce compliance. Participants who sell more tokens than allowed risk having their reputations destroyed, both within the crypto community and beyond. This isnt just a matter of financial lossits an orchestrated attack on an individuals personal and professional identity. By leveraging blockchain technology to permanently record actions and enforce social consequences, the project creates an environment where participants are not just held accountable, but punished in ways that could have lasting and far-reaching effects.
If one were to assume or even attempt to convey the impression that "this is just an experiment," it must be strongly countered that this is happening publicly, accessible to everyone, even recorded on the blockchain, and on X (formerly Twitter), which could lead to individuals being publicly defamed and suffering lasting harm. Since this involves real money, the argument of an "experiment" is entirely baseless. Every participant could be held liable as an accomplice, as the purpose is financial gain, and a criminal offense could be unequivocally proven depending on the participant's country of residence.
The CryptoPunks Connection
The Pledge has garnered attention partly due to the involvement of prominent figures from the CryptoPunks community. While their participation adds credibility, it has also led to increased scrutiny. Critics question the alignment of CryptoPunks ethos with The Pledges controversial practices.
Every X account talking highly of the project seems to be currently affiliated with the project. Mike Hager for example is known to have participated in many previous shady projects, and is among those who are pushing the Pledge narrative.
Zeneca, the famous crypto influencer on X seems to also be "Pledging" his allegiance to this project, as he is pushing the narrative hard on his accounts. It seems that he is either behind the project, or one of the few first investors looking to benefit from an upcoming "Big Dump".
Conclusion: Is The Pledge really Helping Crypto Investors?
While much of the criticism surrounding The Pledge focuses on its apparent focus on financial gain, the project raises deeper ethical and human rights concerns. At its core, The Pledge enforces a system where participants have their autonomy stripped away, placing them in a framework of strict control with public shaming as a form of enforcement. This goes far beyond the typical risks of financial speculation in crypto projects and ventures into a realm that challenges the very foundation of human dignity.
Critics argue that this form of enforcement violates basic human rights. In a world where dignity and the right to privacy are fundamental, The Pledges methods strip away these protections, reducing individuals to pawns in a system that thrives on control and coercion. Participants are not only financially obligated but socially and reputationally bound to the system, with no option to freely exit without significant repercussions.
What makes this even more troubling is the absence of free will within the project. While the founders and their inner circle appear to wield complete control over the rules and enforcement mechanisms, participants are left with little choice but to comply or face public defamation. This has drawn comparisons to totalitarian systems, where the actions of a few dictate the fate of many, and dissent is met with severe punishment.
Read more: https://cryptoticker.io/en/the-pledge-crypto-experiment-controversy/
Text source: CryptoTicker
