Recently, I specifically tracked the frequency and transparency of $SIGN's official external information updates. I did not rely solely on sporadic responses in the community but instead kept a complete record of announcements, progress explanations, Q&A, route adjustments, and other public content. I found that the project's information transparency is extremely low, and the community has long been in an information blind spot. I personally tracked the last 60 days: there were only 3 official announcements, all of which were about collaboration intentions; there were 0 special explanations regarding technical issues, product bugs, progress delays, or community doubts; there were no explanations when key milestones were due, data was not disclosed, and progress was not revealed; the commitments made in the white paper of 'regular weekly reports, transparency, timely synchronization, and facing issues directly' have not been implemented at all in actual operations. $BTC
Previously, a blogger focused on risk control in Web3 projects said: 'Silence is not low-key; it is a lack of information transparency. Long-term lack of communication will only fill the community with suspicion and panic.' The project has things to talk about, but it deliberately remains silent, keeping the community in the dark. #BTC
The more I organize, the more I feel that $SIGN is extremely deficient in information disclosure, only reporting good news and not bad, only promoting without responding. Without increasing transparency, without releasing regular updates, and without directly addressing community questions, even the best projects will be dragged down by suspicion and rumors, undermining the foundation of trust.
BTC
66,757.39
+0.42%
SIGN
0.0336
+4.18%