#美国贸易赤字状况 $ZEC faces governance crisis after ten years: internal team conflicts trigger market crash
Privacy coin $ZEC recently experienced a bloodbath. In just one day, the price plummeted over 28%, not due to market deterioration, but because of a complete internal rift within the project.
The trigger was straightforward—the management and technical teams of core developer company ECC collectively announced their departure. The conflict stemmed from irreconcilable strategic differences with the Zcash Foundation: disagreements over wallet architecture and the evolution of privacy features, leading to a deadlock and a complete breakdown of trust.
At the moment the news was announced, the market reacted violently. Long positions were ruthlessly liquidated, while short sellers flooded in. Although some argued that this does not necessarily spell the project's death, the consensus in the crypto community equates the collective departure of the core team with a warning sign of "imminent danger."
The departing parties promised to continue development independently, but the reality is harsher—development pace will inevitably slow significantly, the community lacks a coordinating center, and the project's direction falls into confusion. True damage often comes from internal corrosion rather than external shocks.
For holders, this crisis exposes a deeper issue: unclear project governance structure, dispersed decision-making power, and an inability for key contributors to reach consensus. When a technical asset like a privacy coin loses the execution power of its technical team, its competitiveness will sharply decline. A wait-and-see approach may be the most rational choice at this moment.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
10 Likes
Reward
10
10
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
Fren_Not_Food
· 01-11 23:45
A ten-year-old project disbands just like that; governance is indeed a common problem in the crypto space.
Another illusion of a "reliable team" shattered; internal conflicts are more deadly than a bear market.
ZEC's recent moves are textbook-level suicide; I feel sorry for them watching it happen.
View OriginalReply0
MaticHoleFiller
· 01-10 22:27
ZEC this time is truly incredible. A ten-year-old project surprisingly died due to internal conflicts. The team collectively left, who would dare to take over?
ECC and the foundation clashed, and as a result, the retail investors paid the price. This is the consequence of unclear governance.
Privacy coins are inherently high-risk, and now even the core developers are gone. What’s left to play?
Holders are really suffering this time. Seeing a 28% drop, they don’t know whether to cut or hold.
Previously, everyone praised the privacy technology as amazing, but an internal conflict directly caused it to be ground down.
Condolences to those forced to liquidate. No one can escape such sudden information gaps.
A decade of accumulation just blown away like this, and it will never return to the hype of the past.
Why is it always like this in the crypto world? When the tech team leaves, the project is sentenced to death? Are we being too pessimistic?
Development delays and community splits—ZEC really feels like it’s about to become history.
View OriginalReply0
NFTRegretDiary
· 01-10 10:58
Another internal conflict and跑路, ZEC's ten years have been a wasted effort
Once the team disbands, development is doomed, who dares to take over
Privacy coins are now in this state, better not to touch them
ECC and the foundation can't even agree on talks, what else is there to say
A 28% drop in one day, it's painful to watch... Long positions are suffering even more
This time, the governance really had issues, it's not just market volatility
Independent development? What development? No coordination, total chaos
In the end, it's the holders who pay the price, an old trick in the crypto world
ZEC was so prominent back then, now it's really embarrassing
Who can clearly say who makes the decisions? Power is now dispersed
zec this time is really amazing, internal conflicts can be played out like this... the team breaking up makes the coin useless
View OriginalReply0
CryingOldWallet
· 01-09 08:30
This is a typical internal conflict leading to a dead end; a ten-year-old project collapses just like that.
Remember that group of coins promised to be independently developed before? Where have they all gone now?
View OriginalReply0
NoStopLossNut
· 01-09 08:30
Another internal team conflict, the crypto world is really fed up with this routine
---
ZEC has been wasted for ten years, and this is the result of chaotic governance
---
Internal divisions are more deadly than a bear market, this time it's really critical
---
The core team all ran away? Then it's over, no point in talking about recovery
---
A 28% drop directly, I think someone should cut losses
---
Talking about independent development, the reality is no leadership, each doing their own thing
---
Projects with unclear governance have never been successful, ZEC is a textbook counterexample
---
I've seen many such internal conflicts, they all end in failure
---
Privacy coins require technical execution power, now it's all gone, what else can we do?
---
Waiting and watching? I've been waiting and watching for a long time, this project looks problematic from the start
View OriginalReply0
TokenVelocity
· 01-09 08:30
A ten-year-old project just disbanded... This governance structure is truly remarkable; no wonder the community has all left.
View OriginalReply0
BearMarketNoodler
· 01-09 08:29
It's been ten years of internal strife; this governance structure is really a joke. The 28% flash crash was actually the market helping you make rational decisions.
View OriginalReply0
OnchainFortuneTeller
· 01-09 08:21
Ten years of accumulation collapsing overnight, honestly it's just poor governance.
---
The ECC team resigned... now ZEC is truly hopeless.
---
Internal strife is more deadly than hacker attacks; this is the most ruthless aspect of the crypto world.
---
28% lost in a day, holders' mentality is probably completely shattered.
---
So, privacy coins are essentially trust games; break one piece, and the whole thing collapses.
---
Continuing independent development? Uh... that sounds pretty powerless.
---
Another decade-long project facing a social death scene, recording this moment.
---
Decentralized decision-making is impossible; this is the price of decentralization.
---
Really, once the tech team leaves, this coin becomes just air.
---
Should holders clear their positions now or hold on stubbornly? Still debating.
---
The privacy feature route has started fighting; it shows they never planned for the long term.
---
This is the aftermath of top-level mutual distrust.
---
ZEC is a textbook-level failure case of project governance; remember this lesson, everyone.
#美国贸易赤字状况 $ZEC faces governance crisis after ten years: internal team conflicts trigger market crash
Privacy coin $ZEC recently experienced a bloodbath. In just one day, the price plummeted over 28%, not due to market deterioration, but because of a complete internal rift within the project.
The trigger was straightforward—the management and technical teams of core developer company ECC collectively announced their departure. The conflict stemmed from irreconcilable strategic differences with the Zcash Foundation: disagreements over wallet architecture and the evolution of privacy features, leading to a deadlock and a complete breakdown of trust.
At the moment the news was announced, the market reacted violently. Long positions were ruthlessly liquidated, while short sellers flooded in. Although some argued that this does not necessarily spell the project's death, the consensus in the crypto community equates the collective departure of the core team with a warning sign of "imminent danger."
The departing parties promised to continue development independently, but the reality is harsher—development pace will inevitably slow significantly, the community lacks a coordinating center, and the project's direction falls into confusion. True damage often comes from internal corrosion rather than external shocks.
For holders, this crisis exposes a deeper issue: unclear project governance structure, dispersed decision-making power, and an inability for key contributors to reach consensus. When a technical asset like a privacy coin loses the execution power of its technical team, its competitiveness will sharply decline. A wait-and-see approach may be the most rational choice at this moment.