title: Crypto.com Just Pulled the Most Brazen Governance Manipulation Stunt in Crypto History

Let’s face it – DAO governance is a joke for token holders but works perfectly for projects looking to maintain control while cosplaying decentralization.

In the rapidly evolving landscape of blockchain technology, Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) have emerged as a promising paradigm for collective decision-making and governance. However, despite the potential of DAOs to empower token holders and foster community engagement, there is growing concern that many projects are exploiting the concept of DAO governance for their own purposes, leaving token holders with little to no real influence.

One glaring instance of this deception comes from the Crypto.com ecosystem, which has become notorious for its blatant manipulation of DAO proposals and its disregard for the interests of token holders.

Crypto.com, the company behind the CRO token and the Crypto.com Exchange, has been a major player in the cryptocurrency industry for several years. The company began its journey as a cryptocurrency platform, but it has since diversified into other areas, such as DeFi and NFTs.

Despite its efforts to present itself as a decentralized entity, Crypto.com has faced criticism for maintaining tight control over its projects and prioritizing its own agenda over the preferences of the community.

Earlier this month, Cronos chain pushed through a proposal to "re-mint" 70 billion CRO tokens. These aren't new tokens - they're the exact 70% of supply that Crypto.com dramatically "burned" in February 2021 right before their mainnet launch.

Back then, they marketed it as the "largest token burn in history" to "fully decentralize the network" (convenient how that blog post is now deleted). The burn did output a short-term buzz, but ultimately, it was an attempt to quickly convert DeFi summer hype into usable value.

After the dust settled and the hype died down, Cronos chain applied for a new proposal to bring back the 70 billion CRO tokens, boasting about how quickly they got the proposal through.

The proposal went through smoothly with an overwhelming majority vote. A total of 1,675 out of 1,761 voted in favor of re-minting the tokens, while only 86 voted against it.

This isn't surprising considering the vast majority of the voting power was concentrated in a few large entities, known as "validators." Out of the 100 validators, only 16 voted against the proposal, while the remaining 84 voted in favor of it.

The small number of validators who voted against the proposal weren't necessarily against the proposal itself, but rather felt pressured to vote no due to the feedback they received from the community.

Many members of the CRO community expressed their disappointment with the proposal and pointed out that it appeared to be designed to benefit Crypto.com at the expense of token holders.

Some community members also noted that the proposal was pushed through too quickly, with insufficient time for discussion and feedback.

Despite the concerns raised by the community, the proposal ultimately passed with an overwhelming majority vote, demonstrating the significant influence that a small number of validators can have over DAO governance.

As industry giants manipulate governance this blatantly, it poisons the well for everyone. It reinforces the worst stereotypes about crypto, undermines projects genuinely trying to share value with token holders, and shows retail exactly where they stand in the hierarchy: dead last, by design.output: Let’s face it – DAO governance is a joke for token holders but works perfectly for projects looking to maintain control while cosplaying decentralization.

I don’t usually pay attention to CRO or the Crypto.com ecosystem (not sure many crypto natives really do), but they just pulled something so brazen it caught my attention and I think it deserves yours too. This isn’t some obscure DeFi project run by anons – this is a company with Super Bowl commercials, arena naming rights, and a seat at regulatory roundtables.

When industry giants manipulate governance this blatantly, it poisons the well for everyone. It reinforces the worst stereotypes about crypto, undermines projects genuinely trying to share value with token holders, and shows retail exactly where they stand in the hierarchy: dead last, by design.

Earlier this month, Cronos chain pushed through a proposal to “re-mint” 70 billion CRO tokens. These aren’t new tokens – they’re the exact 70% of supply that Crypto.com dramatically “burned” in February 2021 right before their mainnet launch.

Back then, they marketed it as the “largest token burn in history” to “fully decentralize the network” (convenient how that blog post is now deleted). The burn did output a short-term buzz, but ultimately, it was an attempt to quickly convert DeFi summer hype into usable value. After the dust settled and the hype died down, Cronos chain applied for a new proposal to bring back the 70 billion CRO tokens, boasting about how quickly they got the proposal through.

The proposal went through smoothly with an overwhelming majority vote. A total of 1,675 out of 1,761 voted in favor of re-minting the tokens