DFINITY Foundation

ICDevs.org

CryptoIsGood

Anvil

ICPL.app

ysyms

The Accumulators’ Neuron

RawTech Venture

Paul Young

ICPMANUAL

8YearGangDAO

Isaac Valadez

Krzysztof

Nicolas.ic

Smaug’s Neuron for Retail Investors

ICLight.io

Taggr Network

Sonic AMM

Rakeoff.io

OpenChat

ELNA AI

GEEKFACTORY

ICP Hub México

ICP Hub Poland

Jerry Banfield

WaterNeuron

ICP Hub Bulgaria

Gold DAO

NeuronPool

LORIMER ♾️ 🐶

B3Pay

ZenithCode

Aviate Labs

D-QUORUM

Yuku AI

CO.DELTA △

DragginCorp

Gwojda

Thyassa

🌮 TACO DAO Neuron

Ωmega-reject

Ωmega-vote

αlpha-vote

Cybersecurity

cyberowl

Dexter Caff/acc

JMVR

Smacker

CodeGov.org (see neuron merger plan with the Wenzel known neuron)

Wenzel

Synapse (see neuron merger plan with the Wenzel known neuron)

“Wenzel Problem” – Concentration of Influence and Off-Chain Coordination

Propose a text that can be adopted or rejected. No code is executed when a motion is adopted. An adopted motion should guide the future strategy of the Internet Computer ecosystem.

## **Problem Statement**

There is mounting concern that governance decisions on the Internet Computer (ICP) are not fully independent, but instead influenced by a small, tightly aligned group of actors.

Wenzel (widely known in the community as **Weasel**, **Fatze**, and other pseudonyms) has emerged as a central figure in ICP governance. He controls significant voting power through known neurons, actively participates in nearly all proposals, and exerts substantial influence over forum discussions—effectively acting as a **de facto gatekeeper** for visibility and narrative on the DFINITY forum.

This influence is **directly amplified by being paid by David Fisher**, a **shady VC** and node provider with large holdings in ICP infrastructure (e.g., WaterNeuron). Wenzel’s coordination with David Fisher—and support from certain DFINITY-affiliated insiders—forms a network that repeatedly benefits the same small circle while ordinary stakers see little return.

### **Observable Patterns**

- Predictable voting blocs forming before proposals gain wide visibility

- Outcomes that disproportionately favor aligned participants (node operators, early investors, and other capital-heavy participants)

- Off-chain influence structures that consistently translate into on-chain results

Whether intentional or emergent, these dynamics **erode trust, discourage participation, and threaten the long-term credibility and decentralization of ICP governance**.

---

## **Key Concerns**

- **Concentration of influence** – A small group, coordinated and paid behind the scenes, controls voting and discourse

- **Lack of transparency** – Relationships, affiliations, financial interests, and incentives are opaque

- **Coordinated-seeming outcomes** – Voting repeatedly favors the same actors, often at odds with staker-wide interests

- **Perception-driven damage** – Even if some elements are overstated, these patterns undermine confidence, reduce staking participation, and hinder ecosystem growth

---

## **Proposed Actions**

### **1. Mandatory Conflict of Interest Disclosure Framework**

Require proposal authors, known neuron controllers, and major voters (e.g., those with &gt;1% voting power or consistent high participation) to publicly disclose:

- Direct or indirect financial interests (node ownership, investments in related projects, grants received)

- Affiliations with DFINITY, node providers, venture funds, or other ecosystem entities

- Any material benefit (personal or professional) reasonably expected from the proposal's passage

Disclosures should be submitted as part of proposal creation or voting registration and maintained in a public, verifiable dashboard.

---

## **Expected Outcomes**

- Greater clarity around incentives and relationships, reducing speculation and conspiracy narratives

- Increased trust in governance processes, encouraging higher staking and participation rates

- Better alignment between NNS outcomes and the interests of the wider staker community

- Stronger defense against gradual centralization, preserving ICP's core decentralized ethos

---

## **Conclusion**

Decentralized governance erodes not through dramatic failures, but through incremental, unchallenged concentrations of power.

Wenzel’s prominent role—combined with being **paid by David Fisher**, the shady VC operating behind the scenes, and support from certain DFINITY insiders—serves as a **clear warning sign**.

Without proactive transparency measures, these dynamics risk further alienating participants and undermining the Internet Computer’s long-term viability as a truly decentralized network.

**Community discussion and concrete proposals on these reforms are urgently needed. Let’s move from perception to verifiable transparency.**

Addressing Governance Integrity Risks (“Wenzel Problem”)