# \[VeBetterDAO Proposal\] Removal of B3tr transit from VBD

**URL:** <https://vechain.discourse.group/t/vebetterdao-proposal-removal-of-b3tr-transit-from-vbd/753>\
**Category:** General\
**Tags:** vebetterdao\
**Created:** [March 26, 2026, 10:03am UTC](https://vechain.discourse.group/t/vebetterdao-proposal-removal-of-b3tr-transit-from-vbd/753 "2026-03-26T10:03:01Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 4

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![B3TR-TRANSIT](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex017/user_avatar/vechain.discourse.group/b3tr-transit/32/432_2.png) [@B3TR-TRANSIT](https://vechain.discourse.group/u/B3TR-TRANSIT)\
**Post date:** [April 6, 2026, 7:53am UTC](https://vechain.discourse.group/t/vebetterdao-proposal-removal-of-b3tr-transit-from-vbd/753/4 "2026-04-06T07:53:28Z")

</div>

1. Core Issue (Stripped of Emotion)

This entire discourse collapses into **one central governance concern** :

I created and funded wallets, some on-chain actions occurred before end users took custody, and those wallets later voted in DAO rounds.

Everything else (speed, silence, projections, tone) is secondary framing.

I did admit this clearly at **27/03 16:38** :

> “Yes — I created and funded the wallets, and some on-chain actions were performed before students got them from partnering companies.”

That admission is factual and cannot be walked back.  
However, **where this discourse goes wrong** is in how it interprets **intent, scope, and mechanics**.

* * *

## 2. What Was Twisted or Overstated

### A. “10-second voting proves automation”

**What I said**

- I ran votes in sequence during onboarding to avoid wasting students’ time.

- I demonstrated on my phone while they followed later after taking their Whatsapp numbers

**What was assumed**

- That each vote equals a unique human importing a wallet and learning DAO mechanics in 10 seconds hence it not being possible

**Reality**

- Voting speed ≠ onboarding speed.

- A developer operating already-eligible wallets can cast votes quickly

- Fast execution alone does **not** prove bots or manipulative

- Taking them through the dapp and then voting in sequence are two separate things

This point is circumstantial, not definitive.

* * *

### B. “Wallets never used other dApps → fake users”

**What I said**

- These were first-time, non-crypto users.

- Onboarding focused on one app, not exploration.

**What was assumed**

- That “organic users” must explore multiple dApps.

**Reality**

- New users often don’t explore.

- Especially in guided pilots, education programs, or incentive-specific onboarding.

This is an assumption, not evidence of fraud.

* * *

### C. “Silence for two months was a lie”

**What I meant**

- Reduced availability / outreach / coordination, not literal inactivity.

**What was done**

- Discord and Telegram messages were counted and framed as contradiction.

**Reality**

- Being “less available” ≠ zero messages.

- This is a semantic dispute, not misconduct.

My phrasing here was imprecise and allowed this attack.

* * *

### D. Website metrics = intentional deception

**What I said**

- The numbers were projections.

- Data was lost due to a code error.

- I acknowledged this publicly and agreed to change it.

**What was claimed**

- “Intentionally or negligently inflated metrics.”

**Reality**

- I did not double down or hide.

- I corrected it when challenged.

- That undermines any claim of intent to deceive.

This was a real mistake, but it is not proof of manipulation.

* * *

---

_[View the full topic](https://vechain.discourse.group/t/vebetterdao-proposal-removal-of-b3tr-transit-from-vbd/753)._