This project, this token, right now is in the hands of the people. Support it. Tank it. Assist it. Embrace it.

06 Apr 2021, 12:14
This project, this token, right now is in the hands of the people. Support it. Tank it. Assist it. Embrace it. It's up to y'all. We really do have faith in people, and freedom. So long as you REALLY have that faith and leave it up to the people, and get the hell out of the way, things can work out in the end. People are SCREAMING for self-sovereignty, to be treated like adults who can and should control their own lives; and yet you can’t demand self-sovereignty and in the same breath demand mommy or daddy or governments or Zuckerberg or Dorsey or RevPop or projects or anyone take care of everything. We're at a seminal point in the world right now. This is man-up / woman-up / human-up time, and not just for this project. We also should remind everyone that from a RevPop perspective, the cryptocurrency is the tail. It will do what it does in the open market. The project, the mission, the technology, the blockchain —this is the dog. RevPop’s attention is on the dog. THAT’s our job. Good luck tomorrow and beyond everyone! While tomorrow might feel (to some of you) like the most important thing on earth wrt RevPop, it really isn’t. There's work to do and that’s what matters 🙂

Same news in other sources

3
07 Apr 2021, 13:28
As this is a tech project, we will not be engaging on market price of the token or anything of that nature. We will focus on ongoing project advancement and we will be updating as we go. Thanks to all those who support the project.
As this is a tech project, we will not be engaging on market price of the token or anything of that nature.
As this is a tech project, we will not be engaging on market price of the token or anything of that nature. We will focus on ongoing project advancement and we will be updating as we go. Thanks to all those who support the project.
06 Apr 2021, 15:41
People should understand that freedom of speech and freedom of expression does not mean that people must be held captive to views and expressions. Someone can express themselves. But other people have equal right to turn away from them and not listen. Moreover you don’t have the right to shout fire in a crowded theater; and with the same logic, arresting someone for murder doesn’t violate their “right to free expression”. The US Supreme Court rendered a case of “censorship” against President Trump for blocking someone on Twitter moot without any dissent from any justice because it was such a no brainer. There’s a big difference between a platform or tech project having the power to ban people from expressing their views in a public square that they’ve tricked people into joining, and someone determining that what’s being said about them, their lives, their friends, their project, their work, is something that they don’t want to be forced to listen to, or pay attention to. If we’re going to address the censorship issue, we must define censorship correctly. Expression isn't a one-way street. You can act like a jerk to someone. But you can’t force them to pay attention to you. Forcing forcing someone to pay attention to you is not a civil right. When there is a pattern of unproductive, unconstructive and/or false and/or openly disrespectful things being said, with very little else being contributed, it’s our (or anyone’s) free speech natural law right to use method’s at disposal to be set free from the captivity of it. The US Supreme Court just agreed with this notion without a single dissent. However, it’s very important to understand that no one entity or person has these answers. That the answers are best left up to the people at large. This is why a multitude of platforms with individual data sovereignty is critical. Those who don’t like us, or anyone, are free to go somewhere else, etc. This is what we’re trying to engender it’ll be away from us, because needless to say we don’t have all the answers. And the simple principal of “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely” holds true. The founding fathers of the US Constitution knew that about themselves! They understood that they were vested with the power of a new nation, and that they THEMSELVES are subject to this principal. So they made sure to enshrine a system where the people would be given self-determination. That’s the best we can do. And we’re committed to these principals…
People should understand that freedom of speech and freedom of expression does not mean that people must be held captive to view
People should understand that freedom of speech and freedom of expression does not mean that people must be held captive to views and expressions. Someone can express themselves. But other people have equal right to turn away from them and not listen. Moreover you don’t have the right to shout fire in a crowded theater; and with the same logic, arresting someone for murder doesn’t violate their “right to free expression”. The US Supreme Court rendered a case of “censorship” against President Trump for blocking someone on Twitter moot without any dissent from any justice because it was such a no brainer. There’s a big difference between a platform or tech project having the power to ban people from expressing their views in a public square that they’ve tricked people into joining, and someone determining that what’s being said about them, their lives, their friends, their project, their work, is something that they don’t want to be forced to listen to, or pay attention to. If we’re going to address the censorship issue, we must define censorship correctly. Expression isn't a one-way street. You can act like a jerk to someone. But you can’t force them to pay attention to you. Forcing forcing someone to pay attention to you is not a civil right. When there is a pattern of unproductive, unconstructive and/or false and/or openly disrespectful things being said, with very little else being contributed, it’s our (or anyone’s) free speech natural law right to use method’s at disposal to be set free from the captivity of it. The US Supreme Court just agreed with this notion — without a single dissent. However, it’s very important to understand that no one entity or person has these answers. That the answers are best left up to the people at large. This is why a multitude of platforms with individual data sovereignty is critical. Those who don’t like us, or anyone, are free to go somewhere else, etc. This is what we’re trying to engender — it’ll be away from us, because needless to say we don’t have all the answers. And the simple principal of “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely” holds true. The founding fathers of the US Constitution knew that about themselves! They understood that they were vested with the power of a new nation, and that they THEMSELVES are subject to this principal. So they made sure to enshrine a system where the people would be given self-determination. That’s the best we can do. And we’re committed to these principals…
06 Apr 2021, 12:37
Be respectful. Be constructive. It's a technology project. Thanks all.
Be respectful. Be constructive. It's a technology project. Thanks all.
Be respectful. Be constructive. It's a technology project. Thanks all.