I would like to share my view on the article cited from Ysyms. My main point is this: While there are valid concerns about certain elements of the ecosystem in general that require further work, I do not agree with the claim that Wenzel is undermining the ICP ecosystem.
Let me explain this in a bit more using the points raised in the article:
Voting Fraud:
It is fair to state that CodeGov has gained a significant amount of voting power through its following. However, I do not believe this amounts to infiltration or fraud in the voting system, and I did not see any supporting evidence for this in the article. People are free to follow the known neurons of their choice. That said, I agree it would be beneficial to expand the range of known neurons (which have the capacity to review NNS proposals in detail) so that participants have more diverse options to follow.
Promoting SNS Rug Pulls:
I agree that several SNS projects have not developed as well as many of us had hoped. I also agree that we need a broader discussion on how to best support successful projects. (Side note: I am somewhat torn here — on one hand, having stricter criteria for project approval could help filter out weak projects; on the other hand, setting the bar too high might cause us to overlook promising ones.) However, I do not find the arguments regarding “rug pull” promotion convincing. Especially at the early stages, it is normal to bet on projects that may ultimately fail. In general, I see sharing information about upcoming projects and launches as a positive contribution to the ecosystem.
Node Attacks:
I agree that there are improvements required for enhancing node network decentralization (as for example discussed in this thread). This is work in progress. Regarding node provider independence, I believe it is very important to define clearly what we mean by “independent” versus “dependent.” For example, the linked forum thread proposes concrete criteria based on the concept of the Ultimate Beneficial Owner (UBO). To my knowledge — and I have not seen evidence to the contrary — Wenzel is not a UBO of any node provider and I do see any evidence that he is involved in any attacks.