Alright, @0xAA_Science, I'll say what AA doesn't want to say, and share some stories about the community. The Scihub community initially "borrowed to create truth". AA became the CTO and gave 20% of the tokens to Alexander (Scihub's founder). At the time, Scihub rode the wave of the Desci track and created good volatility. If you didn't buy at the high point, you wouldn't lose money in the first 7 days. The turning point came when the community token dropped for 11 consecutive days, and everyone was losing money. However, A's test tweet quickly boosted the token price, but the community had already started self-rescue before the tweet. As a video team member, I made a video the day before the pullback, and I still think it's the best meme coin breakout video in all communities. With a test tweet, everyone worked hard because they believed they could do a lot for Desci. Those with money and resources were responsible for listing, while others pushed on Twitter, created spaces, made images, and Official Twitter videos. Overall, the Scihub community had the best meme community atmosphere, which lasted 20 days. The community paid builders very high wages, reimbursing all Blue V memberships, and core builders received 400-800 dollars/month in token rewards. However, no matter how good the community atmosphere is for 20 days, without a pullback, emotions would fade. Why didn't they pull back later? Not because the market maker's strength was insufficient. At the community's most critical moment, Alex didn't help boost momentum and was unwilling to send a single tweet. When market sentiment and community atmosphere were perfect, Alex didn't stand with the community, choosing silence for her so-called reputation. But Scihub was different from other community tokens. Even though AA was the CTO, life and death power was in Alex's hands because she was Sci-Hub's founder. The community token was attached to the website. During the emotional peak, Alex didn't stand with the community. Without Alex's flag, the market couldn't be pulled up. The stagnant market exposed many problems, and internal FUD began. When the token price dropped from 30 million to just 5 million, Alex started large-scale construction, but it was too late. Emotions had dispersed, and people had left. Although Alex later promoted the community under her name, the fact was that when she started, Trump issued a token, the Desci track was falsified, and Scihub couldn't survive. Her subsequent efforts were futile. They then welcomed the second wave of core builders who worked on AI Agents. The product was good, but the timing was missed, emotions had passed, and there was no buying pressure. Why? Because the best time had passed, and meme has a lifecycle - seeking reputation during the high and money during the low. Alex issued the token without any product roadmap or token economics, purely to make money. A friendly reminder: she has already taken 500,000 dollars from the community token and left. Now, Sci-hub has only restarted the server but hasn't made more scientific progress. The community has been pushing the scientific bubble. If we're talking about Desci, the community token doesn't owe Alex anything. Her tweets have cleanly distanced herself. She should have issued the token earlier, not now when the price has dropped. How boring.