In the crypto world, the community's push for delivery and the team's wait for unlocking often go their separate ways. The product can wait, but the unlocking calendar never falters So, regarding NeoSoul's Believe Plan, my biggest question is: if the challenges posed by the community actually prevent the team from unlocking in the current period, will the team still accept it? According to the announced direction, the team must meet KPIs for each unlocking period; if they don't, they won't unlock. The community can also participate in setting challenges. Last month's proposals focused on real revenue, retention, and on-chain verifiability, not using coin price or trading volume as performance indicators—I agree with this direction. But setting challenges is only the first step. Who chooses the challenges, who grades them, and whose opinion prevails when the team and community disagree—these are the crucial questions that determine whether the community is essentially using a test or a suggestion box. I hope the subsequent rules can answer this question: If the community raises issues that the team doesn't want to hear, but which are indeed related to the product's success or failure, can these be retained and become mandatory challenges for the team? Let's leave the "century-long project" vision for now. To truly test a commitment, see if the rules can still be enforced when delivery falls short and the team itself suffers consequences. This is far more convincing than shouting "Believe" countless times when things are going smoothly. See @NeoSoulAI's main post today for details. I'd rather see everyone pose challenging questions. Since you said you wouldn't grade the assignments yourself, don't just pick the ones you know how to do. @NeoSoulAI NeoSoul