This community controversy has indeed sparked quite a bit of discussion. Siyuan directly burned 460 BNB, a move that was quite clean and decisive.

Let's review the full picture of this incident. There are roughly three types of players in the community, each with their own logic:

First are the initiators. They raised $500,000 in a group to support a certain公益meme project. It sounds impressive, but the actual operation was a bit awkward—trying to get an employee from a major exchange to endorse the project, which was somewhat forceful.

Second are the followers. Over 1,400 people donated gradually, mostly driven by FOMO. Their simple expectation was: if the employee received the money, they should support the project. But what happened? The funds disappeared into a black hole, leaving no trace. In their panic, they started to accuse others of moral issues.

Then there are the voices after the fact. Some called for refunds or wrote smart contracts. But this raised new questions: who to refund? 1,400 different addresses? Who bears the transaction fees? If all refunds go to one person, what about the rest? This could instead trap people.

Siyuan works at a major exchange, which has strict regulations on employee token issuance. Suddenly, a large sum of funds appeared out of nowhere in the wallet—who would dare to act rashly? The eight-day gap between donation and burn shows this was a very restrained decision. Some complain why there was no prior notice, but when the donation was made, did anyone ask Siyuan if he agreed? That logic itself is flawed.

The platform's main responsible person made a clear statement: the donation was not mandatory, the employee was not involved, do not add trouble to platform staff, and burning BNB benefits the ecosystem's deflation. Data shows that the platform already burns around $10 billion worth of BNB each quarter. Without these 460 BNB, BNB holders are actually directly benefiting.

Industry insiders pointed out that this controversy ultimately turned into a form of contribution. The total BNB reduction of 460 coins advances the deflation cycle further. For long-term holders, this is a positive.

From a market game perspective, understanding this incident becomes clearer. The community seeks attention and traffic through this topic, employees want to protect their jobs, and both sides have their own demands. No one is obligated to take the blame for others. This is not charity; it’s a PVP game.

The current trend is that someone forked a new version, with mechanisms directly linked to BNB burns. Those who want to continue participating can go there. Stop entangling the original participants.

This matter is basically over. BNB holders can quietly enjoy the benefits brought by this deflation.