u/Crypto_Power1791

Community members are strongly advised not to provide any further money, tokens, liquidity, labor, infrastructure, or promotional support to BlockDAG—or to any DAO, fork, or related venture involving Jeremy Harkness, Nic van den Burgh, or administrators associated with Free Land.
The community has already suffered enough. It should not now be expected to finance another initiative connected to individuals whose prior conduct, private statements, and timing raise serious questions about their motives and credibility.

A private leaked message attributed to Nic van den Burgh after the fork states:
“I am only interested in income for myself and or revenue, and extracting the value that I have in the BDAG business.”

That is not the language of someone primarily concerned with protecting the community or helping victims recover. It expressly communicates a personal financial interest and an intention to extract value from the BlockDAG business.

Nic’s earlier conduct must also be remembered. He concealed or misrepresented GK’s involvement while attempting to silence those raising legitimate warnings. When challenged to provide proof of liquidity to support their promises of a healthy launch, he failed to do so.

Nic’s prior conduct demonstrates that he was complicit in protecting the interests behind BlockDAG rather than its victims. Jeremy Harkness’s conduct raises equally serious concerns.

Jeremy reportedly forked the BlockDAG network in February, around the same period as the planned launch. Despite taking that step, he waited months before publicly speaking out. His public position appeared to change only after he and Nic were no longer being paid.

That timeline deserves close attention. If Jeremy believed the network needed to be forked in February, what did he know at that time? Why did he not disclose those concerns immediately? Why did he not demand that the launch and exchange listings be paused? Why did his public warnings emerge only after the financial relationship had ended?
Leaked messages attributed to Jeremy reportedly show him privately acknowledging that the BlockDAG launch was destined to fail. Yet despite apparently understanding the danger—and reportedly forking the network around the time of launch—he did nothing meaningful to stop it or protect the wider community.

While Jeremy remained silent, Reid and I raised the warnings publicly and took the full beatdown. We endured attacks, threats, ridicule, reputational damage, and repeated efforts to silence us while others possessing relevant information failed to act.

Jeremy Harkness is now promoting a DAO that he says will be funded by the community and will provide direct financial support to selected contributors.

This raises an unavoidable concern: is the same community that suffered the losses now being asked to finance salaries, grants, expenses, or other compensation for Jeremy, Nic van den Burgh, Free Land administrators, or their associates?

Free Land’s administrators must not be permitted to rewrite their role in this history. They attempted to silence or discredit people who warned the community about BlockDAG. They also worked to undermine legal efforts seeking accountability while claiming that they were protecting their investments. Their financial interests appeared to take priority over transparency, accountability, and potential recovery for the broader community.

Calling the new structure a “DAO” does not erase what happened. Promises of community governance do not excuse past concealment, silence, or interference with accountability efforts. Describing payment recipients as “contributors” does not change the fact that community funds may benefit individuals connected to this history.

My position is unequivocal: BlockDAG should not receive another dollar. Neither should any repackaged DAO, fork, recovery project, or associated venture promoted, supported, or controlled by these individuals.

Do not fund it.
Do not provide liquidity.
Do not donate tokens, labor, infrastructure, or promotional support.
Do not allow the same community that suffered the losses to be used as a source of financing again.

Remember who raised the warnings. Remember who attempted to silence them. Remember who apparently knew the danger but failed to act—and examine when they finally decided to speak.
Follow the timeline. Stop giving to people connected to this disaster.

Hi All,

Yesterday, a number of serious and disturbing allegations were made against me within the Freelanders chat. These allegations included claims that I unlawfully used investor funds for purposes unrelated to the DUNA, engaged in fraud, operated a scam, misappropriated community donations, and used investor funds to finance the CoinMarketCap/DL News article. The allegation regarding the DL News article can be publicly refuted by Liam Gallas.

These are not minor disagreements or differences of opinion. Allegations of fraud, theft, misuse of funds, criminal conduct, and intentional investor harm are serious accusations that can significantly damage a person’s reputation, create safety concerns, and expose individuals to personal and professional harm when presented publicly as fact without supporting evidence.

I am aware of and have preserved records of statements made by Gavin, Channele, Michael Elkins, and an individual operating under the username “A compressed 🐳 is still a 🐳.” I am in receipt of those allegations and have documented the statements that were made. Given the seriousness of these accusations, I am currently evaluating all available remedies and options regarding the publication and repetition of false statements concerning myself and the DUNA.

For clarity, Gavin publicly alleged that I was intentionally attempting to harm the investments of other investors. I categorically reject that allegation. At all relevant times, my actions and the actions of the DUNA were undertaken in what we believed to be the best interests of affected investors, with the objective of pursuing accountability, transparency, and potential recovery opportunities.

Additionally, Channele publicly alleged that the DUNA encouraged or directed hundreds of investors to contact exchanges in an effort to have BlockDAG delisted. That allegation is false and unsupported by the documented record.

The evidence reflects that legal counsel acting on behalf of the DUNA issued formal legal notices directly to exchanges and relevant market participants. Those communications were prepared and transmitted by counsel in their professional capacity and not as part of any investor-led campaign. The notices requested that certain market-facing activities be temporarily paused while information was gathered and while efforts were underway to finalize and execute the proposed Letter of Intent and related recovery initiatives.

I am attaching copies of those notices because they demonstrate exactly what occurred. The documented record reflects formal legal communications issued by counsel—not a coordinated effort involving hundreds of investors contacting exchanges. Whether one agrees or disagrees with the legal strategy pursued at the time, the allegation that the DUNA organized or encouraged a mass campaign of investors to pressure exchanges is not supported by the documentary evidence.

At the time those notices were issued, substantial efforts were being made in connection with funding discussions, miner shipment considerations, governance matters, and execution of the proposed transaction. Based upon representations made during those discussions, we were led to believe that the Letter of Intent would be honored and advanced toward completion. However, shortly before the relevant deadlines, Gurhan terminated Antony Turner, resulting in the transaction not proceeding as contemplated. Any suggestion that these actions were undertaken to intentionally harm investors, suppress value, or sabotage opportunities for the community ignores the documented timeline and surrounding circumstances.

I also wish to address allegations concerning the handling of DUNA funds.

Attorneys associated with the DUNA can attest that funds collected for legal efforts have been utilized for legal-related activities. I am in receipt of invoices submitted by the respective law firms involved in these matters.

My hesitation in publicly releasing detailed invoices has not been due to any inability to account for expenditures, but rather concerns that certain itemizations could reveal aspects of legal strategy, legal work product, or ongoing investigative efforts. Nevertheless, I am exploring whether a redacted summary can be released so that the community can independently review the nature of those expenditures without compromising ongoing legal matters.

Furthermore, Channele has publicly represented that fraud was committed because foreign investors were allegedly not informed that they would not benefit from legal action. Such a statement is inaccurate, misleading, and made without firsthand knowledge of the legal strategies, discussions, and efforts that have occurred behind the scenes.

Non-U.S. persons are legally permitted to participate in a Wyoming DUNA. Moreover, the DUNA is not inherently restricted from pursuing legal remedies or coordinated efforts that may involve international jurisdictions where appropriate. Any assertion that foreign participants were categorically excluded from potential benefits or participation is unsupported by the facts and fails to account for the realities of the legal work that has been ongoing.

I have no objection to legitimate questions, scrutiny, or requests for transparency. In fact, accountability is precisely what many of us have been pursuing throughout this process. However, allegations of fraud, criminal conduct, misuse of funds, scams, intentional investor harm, or other serious misconduct should be supported by evidence rather than speculation, rumor, assumptions, or personal animosity.

I remain committed to transparency, accountability, and the objectives for which the DUNA was established. I welcome factual discussion and constructive criticism. What I cannot accept are serious accusations presented as fact without evidence.

Accordingly, I have attached the notices referenced above within the DUNA TG chat so that community members can review the underlying documentation for themselves and evaluate the allegations against the actual record rather than unsupported characterizations of events.

Thank you.

Mo here. Many of you know by now, I created this community initially because plenty of us were censored for speaking up against BlockDAG.

Another advise of caution to the community. Do not buy or invest in this garbage.

As many of you already know, I was one of the community leaders who was “blacklisted” for speaking up against BlockDAG and calling out their lies. I spent almost 40K USD to have all of my tokens not claimable during the initial TGE phase. They are useless either ways.

Stop falling for Nic’s lies on AMA. He’s as much of a scammer like G is, intentionally lying while pretending to be “listening to community.” Jeremy on the other hand magically secured miners according to him that are outside of BlockDAG to sell. Yet, the original miners which were purchased have never been honored. I’ve further learned that gold shell was under the impression he secured those miners as CTO of BlockDAG, contrary to his statements that he is not a BlockDAG employee.

BlockDAG paid for misinformation campaigns in the media referring to me and others as “scammers,” undermining the credibility of the DUNA, through false publications and circulations. At one point, hackers were paid to hack me through orders of Gurhan.

No legit project needs to stoop to this level. Added to this is the shady marketing, missing funds, promises of ROIs, absence of liquidity etc.

For those wondering why no legal updates on Reddit, those are shared via the Duna channel itself to those who are Duna members. That explains why just a handful of posts within this forum have been requesting updates vs a bulk majority of posts. Duna channel comprises of 500+ members.

My advice to investors, STOP BUYING. DO NOT BUY. DO NOT INVEST IN MINERS BEING SOLD BY JEREMY. AND BE CAUTIOUS OF BLOCKDAG FREELANDERS. That group is a pro-BlockDAG group, despite egregious concerns that remains in the community. In fact, they have Jeremy and Nic as admins in that group selling promises of tier 1s and selling miners all over again.

Not every so called community leader that pretends to advocate for you actually does.

If you’ve ever felt priced out, stuck in traffic, or watched a network crash when demand spikes, this article is for you. It explains in plain language why faster alone never fixed congestion, fees, or outages and why structural design matters more than demos or benchmarks.

Learn why Ethereum, Solana, and Bitcoin all hit the same limits, and how a different approach could avoid those pain points for everyday users.

🔥 Read the full article and join the conversation:

👉 https://medium.com/@PYRAXNetwork/why-every-faster-blockchain-keeps-running-into-the-same-problems-de887b7489ae

If you want to follow the project or discuss these ideas with the team, you can find the community here:

https://t.me/PYRAXNetwork