#稳定币发行与品种 Seeing the open letter from Neo's founder, I have to be honest — internal disputes like this are actually a mirror reflecting many projects' true nature.

I remember those early projects, which initially promoted themselves with dazzling hype, and the founding teams seemed united. But it didn't take long before they started tearing each other apart, with unclear fund flows from the foundation, and investors ending up as scapegoats. Now that Neo openly discusses these issues, it actually reveals the truth — rather than hiding and eventually exploding, it's better to bring problems to the table.

But this is also a test. Zhang Zhengwen said to focus on development, stablecoins, and RWA, which sounds fine, but the key is whether they can truly deliver. I've seen too many projects use "long-term development" as a cover, while in reality, they are just buying time to cover up lies. So my standard is simple — watch Neo's code updates and ecosystem application implementation over the next six months, not just listen to promises.

Particularly with stablecoins, caution is essential. Historically, many projects have claimed to have "their own stablecoin," only to end up as tools to harvest retail investors. Neo must have comprehensive risk disclosures and transparent mechanism design if they want to succeed in this area; otherwise, it's just the old tricks in a new bottle.

Short-term disputes will indeed pass, but investors need to learn — don't be blinded by promises of "long-term development." Projects truly worth following speak with data and tangible results.