Actually, I think the worst attacks are when it only takes 20% of an SNS voting power to paralyze and/or destroy an SNS. NFID Wallet is a great example. Good product, good team, well conceived and executed project, and yet all of a sudden Adam decides that they did something wrong and he single handedly owns enough voting power to block proposal 17 to fund the NFID foundation for a quarter or proposal 18 to set proposal topics. It doesn’t take much to hurt a project when the threshold for critical proposals is 2/3 majority, which means the threshold to paralyze a project is only 1/3.
This is currently a weakness for ICVC, DecideAI, Catalyze, KongSwap, GoldDAO, NFID Wallet, and Nuance based on how much of the swap commitment Adam was able to buy. It gives him enough voting power in each of those SNS projects to make progress difficult and in some cases he is actively paralyzing all progress.
What he is doing to ICPCC (e.g. proposal 64) really sucks for the people who are passionate about the project (of which there are many, some who are ICP OGs with large followings), but at least he is taking it over by actually having to purchase 40+ % of the SNS. He can turn it into something else and build a new community just like he did for SNS-1. That’s at least better than leaving a project paralyzed.