The WLFI official has responded positively to the core controversy this time. From the explanation, this logic is not too problematic: using WLFI as collateral to borrow stablecoins is essentially building liquidity and anchoring yields, which is not uncommon in DeFi. In the past six months, the team has indeed spent over 65 million US dollars to repurchase 435 million WLFIs, indicating that the project is not idle, with products, revenue, and various actions constantly taking place. The real point of controversy is actually quite direct. USD1 has income, and the team is repurchasing, but how this value is reflected back to WLFI is still unclear to the market, and the price has continued to decline. In the early days, the chips were locked for 2 years, and everyone was not against the project doing business, but they could not accept that the project was becoming more and more decent, while their own coins were becoming less and less valuable. Ultimately, it is still an old problem in this industry: the value connection between tokens and actual business is too weak. What everyone really wants to see is not that the project will make money, but whether the money earned can be more clearly returned to the coin price. The discussion on governance proposals next week may be the focus of attention.