Riding the Celo Bus Together - An Urgent Invitation to Safe Dialogue and Real Repair

[WillRuddick]

Riding the Celo Bus Together

• An Urgent Invitation to Safe Dialogue and Real Repair

Hey Celo family,

Grassroots Economics got on the Celo bus after working with many blockchains in 2022 because of you … because this community welcomed us, challenged us, and invited us to help build the rails for decentralized value exchange across the neighborhoods, cities, settlements, and cooperatives we serve. We didn’t come only to use infrastructure; we came to help secure it - to be part of the system that makes fair exchange possible for people who need it most.

We got here because of Celo’s beautiful mission, which moved many of us to action:

**“Our mission is to build a regenerative digital economy that creates conditions of prosperity for all.”
**
This mission and its underlying philosophy are directly inspired by the work of Charles Eisenstein, particularly his book Sacred Economics. Sep Kamvar, one of Celo’s co-founders, has cited Eisenstein’s ideas as foundational to the project.

Vitalik has reminded us that when things get tight, we tighten our belts and build smart, lean, and real together. That lands strongly for me right now. It’s time to do both: keep shipping what grows Celo (TVL, transactions, real users) and make space for housekeeping we’ve put off.

My personal concern is that we have made enemies of each other - instead of addressing concerns and finding a way forward (when we need each other the most right now).

Said plainly: too many people have come to me distressed about Celo for me to ignore their concerns. Before we accelerate, we need some accounting, some dialogue, and some clearing of the air. Not to tear anyone down … to make us stronger.

What I’m asking for

• A safe, time-boxed dialogue as soon as possible - with Celo leadership, Celo Foundation and those concerned in the community.

• I’m happy to help schedule and co-facilitate with someone trusted by all sides.

• A clear container: no character assassinations, no public shaming - just facts, feelings, impacts, needs, requests and fixes.

What will come up:

Conflicts of interest. Embezzlement allegations. Centralization. Funding and spending audits. Broken promises. These are hard words, but they’re easier than letting hurt fester. I’ve spoken with folks across all “sides,” and I truly believe we’re on the same bus. We can face this like trauma-informed adults and leave with next steps we all recognize as fair.

How I am imagining we’ll hold the space:

• Psychological safety first: ground rules, right of reply, and shared notes.

• Facts over labels: who/what/when documents over adjectives.

• Forward motion: admit where we failed, name remedies, assign owners and dates.

• Do no harm: protect ongoing field work while we fix the pipes.

• Grow Community: Seeking to move forward as a whole community honoring the Celo mission.

If this resonates, please add a “+1 for safe dialogue” below, and suggest a co-facilitator you trust as well as who needs to attend. If you’ve got documents, evidence or timelines to share, say so and we’ll set a secure way to receive them.

We came to Celo for a reason: to build a humane, resilient economy together. Let’s honor that by telling the truth, repairing where needed, and getting back to the work that brought us here.

With respect and resolve,

Will
Grassroots Economics

[Thylacine]

I feel there’s missing context here. Are you asking for mediation between Grassroots Economics and Celo stakeholders? Or the Celo community as a whole with Celo stakeholders/leadership?

Given the human resource cost of having a number of people in the room at the same time, what is the problem you are trying to solve and what outcomes would you like at the end?

I fully support open and candid conversations, but unclear specifically what this post is addressing (something related to Grassroots or just Celo direction in general).

[Thylacine]

@WillRuddick

Conflicts of interest. Embezzlement allegations. Centralization. Funding and spending audits. Broken promises

I realize you did put some topics here, but is this related to Celo in-general? Or something related to Grassroots economics and your engagement with Celo?

[WillRuddick]

Thanks, Thylacine - great questions. in short: this is not a Grassroots-vs-X mediation; it’s a community-wide, values/operations check-in so we stop talking past each other and agree on a sane process. A lot of people (across roles) have flagged the same concerns privately; the goal is one short, safe container to align on next steps - not a blame session.

Problem we’re trying to solve:

• Rumors, side-DMs, and fragmented “he said/she said” around conflicts of interest, funding transparency, and decentralization are creating mistrust and churn.

What this post is addressing:

• Celo-wide direction & stewardship norms, not a Grassroots Economics dispute. I’m offering to help convene and co-facilitate.

Proposed outcome of one 75–90 min session:

1. Agree on a fact-first process (what gets reviewed, by whom, and by when).

2. Name owners and timelines (e.g., impact report, tokenomics memo, savings plan; right-of-reply).

3. Decide whether to proceed to a Snapshot temperature check on a concrete package.

4. Publish a public summary + action list; no doxxing, no shaming.

Who should be in the room (lean, representative):

• 1–2 from Celo leadership/cLabs, 1–2 from Celo Foundation, 1–2 from Celo Public Goods,

• 2–3 validators/delegates, 1–2 community RPC/infra, 2–3 field projects (incl. critics/supporters).
  (Open to anyone to listen; speakers limited to keep it efficient.)

How we’ll keep HR cost low & useful:

• Pre-submit topics/evidence in a simple form; time-boxed agenda; right-of-reply; shared notes; clear next steps.

I’m open to suggestions and I encourage folks to speak up.

[ddd]

I fully support @WillRuddick’s call to action. Rene’s Vision 2030 speaks of building “new systems, not replicating old ones” and being “values-driven stewards.” Marek’s reflection on Celo as a cultural extension of Ethereum also emphasizes our regenerative principles and real-world impact. I believe these values should guide how we allocate community resources.

I’ve heard concerns from former CeloPG stewards, at least one has stepped away from the public goods funding space entirely because of what they observed. These concerns deserve to be taken seriously, and I hope those affected will feel welcome to share their perspectives when they’re ready.

As co-founder of GainForest, an Ethereum Next Billion Fellow that has onboarded communities around the world to Celo, advocated and build on Celo, and brought core infrastructure and partnerships like Hypercerts, EAS and Splits to our ecosystem, I’ve experienced this directly: governance uncertainty and lack of accountability carry reputational costs that extend beyond Celo. These issues have directly affected my ability to form partnerships, attract and retain talent for Celo, and plan long-term initiatives. They shape what we can build and who chooses to build with us.

Thus, I’d welcome a comprehensive transparency review of community funds, including an audit of fund utilization and a clear conflict of interest policy. This would help ensure we’re living up to the values we communicate and strengthen community trust in our governance processes.

David Dao
Co-Founder, GainForest

[davidcasey]

@willruddick , thank you for writing this and for the way you’ve written it.

I’m showing up here wearing two hats:

• as Director of Funding the Commons, which has worked closely with Celo across conferences, residencies, and public-goods pilots

• as a Celo Scout on the venture team, supporting builders (many in emerging markets) to choose Celo as a home for their work. In this second capacity, I also want to name that I played a small but meaningful role in inviting Will and Grassroots Economics into the Celo ecosystem. I did that because I see you as one of the clearest voices we have from the field: someone who has spent years building actual circuits of trust, value, and resilience with communities that most “web3 for good” narratives only gesture toward.

From this vantage point, I want to state:
I share your concern that we’re carrying unresolved conflict, and that it’s starting to bend the culture of this ecosystem away from the mission that brought many of us here.

“A regenerative digital economy that creates conditions of prosperity for all”

If we’re serious about that sentence, then we have to be equally serious about how power, capital, and decision-making move inside our own house - especially when words like centralization, conflicts of interest, embezzlement allegations, and broken promises are in the air.

At the same time, I deeply resonate with your framing that we are “on the same bus.” I don’t want a spectacle - I want us to do real and productive housekeeping so the bus is safe to ride for the next decade - for builders, for communities, and for the people staking their reputations on Celo across the world.

A few concrete +1’s from my side:

1. +1 to a safe, time-boxed dialogue.
   I support convening a structured process with Celo Foundation / leadership, representatives from core ecosystem orgs, community members who have raised concerns, and those community members whose work depends on Celo remaining a credible home for the public goods movement. I’m willing to participate in whatever role is most useful: listener, witness, active contributor.

2. +1 to a “facts + impacts + remedies” frame (rather than character assassination).
   I appreciate your emphasis on psychological safety, right of reply, documentation over gossip, and leaving the room with owners, timelines, and concrete repairs rather than just more fragments of picture.

   From my work at Funding the Commons, I’ve seen how much damage is done, quietly and gradually over time, when trust is eroded but never named. Let’s face it cleanly, even if it’s uncomfortable.

3. Suggestion on co-facilitation.
   In addition to Will, I’d like to suggest @ddd as a potential co-facilitator or co-steward for this process.
   David has been working with us on impact and evaluation models for public-goods funding, and he’s someone I’ve seen hold both high technical rigor and deep care for communities in climate and resilience work. He’s trusted across several ecosystems that I touch, often has served informally as an ambassador of Celo including spaces beyond web3, and has a good instinct for separating structural questions from personal attacks.

   That’s just my suggestion - the key is that whoever facilitates is trusted, trauma-informed, and not perceived as captured by one side or another.

4. Commitment from my side.
   I’m willing to show up in whatever closed or semi-closed container is created to help this move forward.
   I’m also willing, where appropriate, to bring some of the pattern-recognition from Funding the Commons’ work with other ecosystems facing similar “growing-up pains”: how they mapped conflicts of interest, did lightweight audits, and reset norms without blowing everything up.

My hope in all of this is simple:

That we can tell the truth, repair what needs repairing, and restore enough trust that people like Will, who have spent decades building economic alternatives in the real world - feel excited and values-aligned to continue building this ecosystem, across countless competing communities that would welcome Will into the fold.

If someone like Will that does the kind of work that fits Celo’s mission so well doesn’t feel at home here, then our public mission statement and values become hollow.

Thank you again for naming what many people have been feeling but did not know how to say in public. I’m here for the dialogue and look forward to being in the room when it happens.

With respect and solidarity,

David Casey
Director, Funding the Commons
Celo Scout (Venture Team)

[Thylacine]

Great reply also @davidcasey .

I’d possibly be willing to participate as a multi-hat wearing Celo community member. However I probably wouldn’t participate unless the actual stakeholders who can enact change after the conversations are present, and there’s a commitment on actions or a decision tree to be decided on up front, resulting in clear tasks that each have an owner and timeline.

I fully understand how you’ve proposed the forum @WillRuddick is exactly to avoid people soapboxing a laundry list of issues, but I think it needs clear moderation and an action bias.

[sirpy]

Thanks Will.

While I’m not aware of the concerns raised here, I would love to see such regular sessions involving the different stakeholders where we could reach better collaboration going forward. Is that a mission for the foundation @ericnakagawa ?
Your thoughts @LuukDAO @marek @rene_celo

I’ve always enjoyed the sessions facilitated by the Trusted Seed @MaxSemenchuk and also Andrej Berlin could be a good co-facilitator

Hadar
Good Labs (GoodDollar)

[Thylacine]

@ericnakagawa Is on the Self side now for the most part I believe @sirpy . @liz_celo might be a better tag here.

[annaalexa]

Thank you, @WillRuddick, and thanks to everyone who has contributed so thoughtfully in this thread.

We hear and resonate with the concerns being raised here. The level of care and engagement from so many community members shows how deeply people want Celo to succeed, and how committed we all are to building a regenerative digital economy.

From the Celo Foundation side, we fully support Will and the team in moving this initiative forward. We are committed to participating in a focused, well-facilitated session grounded in facts, right of reply, and clear next steps and will ensure that the appropriate stakeholders and leadership from both the Foundation and cLabs are present.

We hold ourselves to a high standard of transparency and accountability, and we believe these expectations should apply consistently across all ecosystem groups. If there are concerns or questions anywhere in the community, we fully support addressing them openly through a structured and transparent session.

To help make the session as productive as possible, we encourage the facilitators to invite representatives from all relevant community groups to participate in the discussion. We also support aiming for a session toward the end of next week to allow time for a summary and proposed actions to be shared on the Forum before year-end and for the outcomes to inform 2026 planning.

As always, our intention is to show up as a supportive, constructive, and balanced participant focused on what best serves the long-term health and mission of the Celo ecosystem and its community.

We look forward to next steps and participating in the dialogue!

[yomfana]

Thank you for opening this dicusssion and to everyone contributing thoughtfully. It was much needed.

I want to share my perspective based on quite some time of engagement with governance accountability issues in our ecosystem.

For some time now, I have kept my DMs open to receive whistle-blower reports. I have received numerous reports concerning various entities across the ecosystem. A few months ago, I also approached Celo Foundation leadership with a proposal to establish an independent transparency committee with authority to demand accountability from any entity. Our discussions concluded that the Foundation would continue fulfilling this role: An outcome I continue to remain open to.

During the Season 0 - Season 1 period, I applied pressure on certain entities (particularly regional DAOs) regarding their shortcomings, hoping to drive improvement. Simultaneously, I was sitting on some evidence of some issues but chose not to publish it because I assessed the community wasn’t ready for drastic action. This assessment was partly influenced by pushback I received when calling for retroactive funding cuts to Stabila and CeLatam.

I’ve also observed a systemic problem; certain entities enjoy “the crown’s blessing” and are not subject to the same rigor of scrutiny or reporting standards that others face. This disparity is evident in the treatment of CGP 84, 147, 170, and 199 among others. This raises a fundamental question: why focus on cutting tentacles while leaving the octopus alive?

CGP 204 further demonstrated problematic power dynamics, passing in record time with remarkable coordination, including on-chain sponsorship from parties expected to remain neutral. This was a show of institutional influence, not open community governance.

If we are serious about fixing this before it is too late, I propose the following:

1. Maintain Public Discourse: Keep all discussions public and in text form on the forum, which is designed for this purpose. Every serious blockchain ecosystem operates this way because public discourse creates a shared understanding of facts and allows community members to evaluate evidence directly. Pressure for reform must come from informed voters, not private negotiations. This approach mirrors successful investigative journalism practices globally and is exemplified by NEAR and Optimism (simply search “complaint”, or “transparency”). Note: I am not opposed to closed calls to establish facts or lay the groundwork for this process. However, it is essential that the primary discourse occur publicly on the forum, where transparency and community participation can be ensured. Private dialogues, while well-intentioned, often obscure facts and dilute accountability.
2. Separate Personal Relationships from Professional Responsibilities: The current reluctance to challenge problematic practices stems largely from personal connections to those who might be implicated. We must be willing to uphold standards even when it affects people we like or work with.
3. Establish Universal Standards: Apply identical rules, reporting requirements, and accountability measures to all entities regardless of their connections or status within the ecosystem.
4. Establish Clear Consequences for Misconduct: Develop a transparent framework (including COI policies) for addressing violations, including proportional penalties and remediation requirements.

My commitment: Towards the end of Season 1, I will try and review all reports I have received and publish concrete and verifiable documented evidence regarding any entity I find to be misaligned with our shared values.

[Thylacine]

Let’s move forward then.

@WillRuddick Are you the owner of this process?

Do we have the right people confirmed as available to attend? I kind of just want to go to find out what all this is about.

[davidcasey]

Second the recommendation for Andrej Berlin - outstanding facilitator!

[WillRuddick]

Celo-Bus Station: Session #1 (Open Community Call)

When: Thursday 11th 4:00–6:00 pm EAT (Africa/Nairobi)
Where: Zoom - join here: Zoom**
Format:** Public session; no recordings and no bots allowed

Why we’re meeting
To hold a calm, caring space to air concerns, share context, and agree on next steps that keep Celo healthy and mission-aligned.

Who’s holding space
Grassroots Economics Foundation will host a first, gentle community dialogue session focused on:

• Cultivating a container for shared understanding
• Making tensions visible
• Humanizing one another
• Setting the path for healing and governance repair

This first meeting is a container for listening, naming what is alive, and identifying common ground.

This creates a structured process from hearing → understanding → repair → co-creation.

We aim toward:

1. Deeper conflict exploration

2. Governance repair & accountability pathways

3. Visioning & consensus-building

Who from Grassroots Economics will be there and how they are involved in Celo:

• Aude Peronne - Ecosystem and Community Lead

• Mohammed Sohail - Tokenomics & Validators

• Will Ruddick - Founding Intentions

• Njambi Njoroge - Field Operations

We also welcome anyone who can serve in a caring role with Celo’s best interest at heart.
Eg. Andrej Berlin - please email info@grassecon.org to help co-facilitate.

Ground rules (please read)

• No recording. No bots. Be present.

• Facts over labels; right of reply will be honored.

• Do no harm: protect ongoing work while discussing hard issues.

• Grassroots Economics will keep private notes and will only post publicly issues and action items that support the Celo Community after the session.

Tentative flow (120 minutes)

1. Cultivating a container for shared understanding: Welcome & norms (10m)

2. Making tensions visible:

   1. Lightning context from speakers (20m)

   2. Community inputs & right-of-reply (40m)

3. Humanizing one another: Focus topics (conflicts of interest, funding/audits, decentralization & validator roles, unmet commitments) (40m)

4. Setting the path for healing and governance repair: Next steps: owners, timelines, and how we’ll report back (10m)

**
Share sensitive issues ahead of time**
If you want something handled carefully, email info@grassecon.org with “Celo-Bus Station Confidential” in the subject. Emails will be treated as confidential. We will not publish them; we’ll make space to surface themes during the call.

RSVP / Help

• React on this post (not to flood the forum) - so we can size the room.

Let’s show what it looks like to fix things together - steadily, respectfully, and in service of Celo’s mission.