Frank DeGods is out. Sales are up. Putting aside for a moment what all of this says about the merits of decentralization itself…
News of Rohun Vora’s departure, “Frank DeGods,” from the DeGods NFT project sent shockwaves through the crypto landscape. While he denies any wrongdoing, the market reacted positively with sales surging on both Solana and Ethereum (Solana up 101%, Ethereum a staggering 156%!). It begs a fundamental question: Are we really as decentralized as we think we are?
Do NFTs Need a Figurehead?
Let’s get real, how many NFT projects actually function like DAOs right out of the gate? Most, if not all, start with a core team, a visionary leader, a "Frank DeGods" figure, driving the project forward. We, the investors, the community, should demand to see that leader. We want a name, we want a narrative, we want a beacon of accountability (or scapegoat, on any given day).
Think about it. For us, we believe in the idea, of course, but equally important we invest in the people behind that idea. We believe in their vision, their talent to execute. Isn't that just… investing? Without all this blockchain buzz word stuff, aren’t we just investing in a company, a brand, that has a pretty face, a good CEO.
Perhaps the most revealing part of the market’s reaction to Frank’s departure is who was happy. That spike in sales seems to indicate that maybe the project was a bit over dependent on one person. Or, more cynically, the market saw his exit as an opportunity, a fresh start, a chance for real decentralization to finally take hold. Is that even possible?
Centralization's Shadow: Always Lurking?
Here’s the uncomfortable truth, real decentralization is really damn difficult. This means it needs a totally non-hierarchical structure, non-distribution of power, and a community that can practice self-governance. How many projects actually manage that? It's like communism in practice. Sounds good in theory, seldom successful in practice.
Even with DAOs, there's often a core group of developers, early investors, or influential community members who wield disproportionate power. They control the code, the treasury, what direction the project moves in. Is that really decentralization, or merely an elaborately wrapped oligarchy?
Look at the traditional world. We see this pattern everywhere. A charismatic founder builds a company. They become synonymous with the brand. Upon their departure, the business either becomes a huge success story, a cautionary tale, or an acquisition target. Blockchain doesn’t magically erase human nature. It doesn’t change the underlying product – it just moves it to a digital public ledger.
Consider Apple without Steve Jobs. Or Tesla without Elon Musk. These companies are certainly bigger than any one person. If/when their charismatic leaders pass on, it will be a big shake-up and possibly inner turmoil. So why should we think NFT projects will be different?
Is Honesty the Best Policy?
Perhaps now would be a good opportunity to take a more transparent look at what decentralization should or should not entail in the NFT space. Face it — the vast majority of these projects are, at their core, giant centralizing projects. In reality, most of them simply gussy themselves up with a little blockchain window dressing.
Pastagotsauce hinting at making DeGods as "big as possible" rather than just building "crypto products" further reinforces this shift towards a more traditional business model. Is this really a betrayal of the decentralized ethos? Or a pragmatic evolution?
Maybe the answer isn’t doing everything possible to decentralize everything, but just being more thoughtful and responsible about taking a couple steps in that direction. Leadership will always be a crucial factor to any initiative, so recognize this and establish structures for community guidance and governance. Be transparent about decision-making processes. Don't sell a fairytale of complete decentralization if you can't deliver it.
The DeGods situation isn't unique. It's a microcosm of the broader tension between the ideals of decentralization and the realities of building a successful project. Perhaps Frank’s departure will be the catalyst for that positive change, the opportunity for DeGods to genuinely live up to their commitment to community ownership. That would be a great thing to remind them with. Sensibly enough, even in the allegedly decentralized universe of NFTs, human nature and the craving for strong leadership prevail.
Ultimately, the future of DeGods, and the broader NFT space, hinges on our ability to have an honest conversation about decentralization, its limitations, and its true potential. We know what the alternative looks like. It’s time to stop pursuing a myth and acknowledge that real decision-making power lies firmly within the control of a mere handful. And that would, my friends, be the real rug pull.
