Electric Coin Company team behind Zcash quits over governance clash – Why?

ambcryptoPubblicato 2026-01-09Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-01-09

Introduzione

Electric Coin Company (ECC), a key developer of Zcash, has resigned due to a governance dispute with the nonprofit Bootstrap. ECC CEO Josh Swihart cited a "clear misalignment" with Zcash's mission, making it impossible to work effectively. ECC will form a new company, but the Zcash protocol remains unaffected. Bootstrap defended its position, stating the conflict arose from legal compliance concerns regarding ECC's plan to privatize the Zashi wallet, which could risk lawsuits and damage credibility. Despite initial market confusion causing a 22% drop in ZEC's price, it later recovered by 10% as the team announced a new wallet, CashZ, and reinforced long-term commitment. Sentiment improved, with 61% of Binance traders turning bullish on ZEC.

Electric Coin Company (ECC), one of the key developer teams behind the Zcash network, has called it quits over a governance dispute with Bootstrap, a nonprofit that governs it.

According to ECC CEO Josh Swihart, the nonprofit moved into a “clear misalignment” with Zcash’s mission. Swihart added that the Bootstrap board made it impossible to work “effectively and with integrity.”

He said that they’ll form a new company with the same team, reiterating that the Zcash protocol remains unaffected.

“The Zcash protocol is unaffected. This decision is simply about protecting our team’s work from malicious governance actions that have made it impossible to honor ECC’s original mission.”

All about Bootstrap’s position

In response, the Bootstrap board defended itself, stating that the disagreement is instead due to compliance issues. The contentious plan reportedly involves the privatization of the Zcash-based Zashi wallet via alternative structures.

As a nonprofit organization, the board believes the plan to privatize Zashi could attract lawsuits from its donors. Bootstrap also believes that the legal limitations can’t be overlooked, despite the proposed Zashi plan being apt.

“Their (ECC) commitment to the project is real, and their frustration with the constraints of nonprofit governance is understandable. But good intentions do not satisfy legal requirements, and urgency does not excuse a flawed process.”

According to the board, its stance is not a disagreement with the Zcash mission, adding that a hurried restructuring would dent the protocol’s trust.

“A restructuring done in a way that invites scrutiny, even if well-intentioned, would damage that credibility and set back the cause of privacy and financial freedom.”

Here, it’s worth pointing out that a few hours later, former ECC CEO Josh Swihart announced CashZ – A new Zcash wallet to scale the protocol to mass adoption.

For his part, Dragonfly Managing Partner Hasseb Qureshi billed the Swihart-led team as “true believers” and an overall bullish rating for ZEC coin. He said,

“Say what you will about them, the Zcash team are true believers and cypherpunks. When a project is driven by conviction, it survives where others would wither.”

ZEC sees mixed results

Initially, the ZEC coin dumped by 22% from $490 to a low of $381 as the market wrongfully interpreted the update as core developers abandoning the protocol entirely.

However, it was just an organizational change. In fact, at press time, ZEC had rallied by 10% to a high of $438 after the team unveiled a new wallet and reinforced long-term conviction.

Meanwhile, the number of traders bullish on ZEC jumped to 61% on Binance at the time of writing, underscoring renewed positive sentiment.


Final Thoughts

  • Electric Coin Company CEO blamed Bootstrap nonprofit for “clear misalignment” with the Zcash mission.
  • However, the nonprofit maintains that the ECC disagreement is only based on legal and compliance issues.

Crypto di tendenza

Letture associate

Global Stock Market's Storm Center: South Korea's Stock Market De-leveraging Is Largely Complete

Storm's Eye: South Korean Market De-leveraging Nears Completion The recent sharp correction in South Korean equities, with the KOSPI index dropping 32% from its June high, has been a key trigger for global tech stock volatility. The core driver was not a fundamental shift but a forced de-leveraging process within the market's unique structure, which is now largely complete. Two main leverage channels amplified the sell-off: 1. **Leveraged ETFs:** Their size, proportionally four times larger than in the U.S., peaked near $50 billion. Their mandatory daily rebalancing mechanism created a vicious cycle of "price drop → forced selling → further drop." Approximately 75% of this excess has been unwound, shrinking to $26 billion, with regulatory curbs now blocking new inflows. 2. **Hedge Fund Leverage:** Using swaps to magnify exposure, hedge funds saw their net long positioning fall by over 50% from peak levels. The most intense phase of this institutional de-leveraging is over. In contrast, **retail margin debt** poses minimal systemic risk. At 0.5% of market cap, it is far lower than in the U.S. or China, lacks automatic triggers, and is concentrated in smaller stocks. The conclusion: the high-leverage structures most prone to "chain-reaction selling" have been substantially cleared. The market is transitioning from a liquidity-driven crash to one priced more on fundamentals. The article argues that the AI trend—centered on Korean memory chips—remains intact. This episode represents a painful but necessary clearing of crowded trades, not the end of the AI revolution. For investors, the key question is conviction in the long-term AI direction; if the trend is real, current volatility is a cost of entry, not a terminal risk.

链捕手59 min fa

Global Stock Market's Storm Center: South Korea's Stock Market De-leveraging Is Largely Complete

链捕手59 min fa

The Eternal Fragments of Money: Third-Party Payment Has No First Principle

"The Enduring Fragments of Money: Third-Party Payments Lack a First Principle" Stripe is reportedly attempting to acquire PayPal, marking a significant shift reminiscent of PayPal's merger with the original X.com 30 years ago. The article analyzes Stripe's strategic challenges and the broader payments industry landscape. Despite its initial success with a developer-friendly API model, Stripe missed its optimal IPO window during the pandemic and has since seen its valuation decline. Its attempts to expand through acquisitions and new ventures, particularly in stablecoins (like its OUSD project) and Agent-focused payments (ACP/MPP protocols), have faced headwinds. The author argues that the payment industry remains highly fragmented and is ultimately an adjunct to the traditional banking system. This structure limits the potential for any single player, including Stripe, to achieve complete dominance. While stablecoins and the future rise of autonomous Agent economies present potential growth avenues, they are not yet mainstream and still require integration with the existing financial system. For now, Agent-based transactions are largely used for speculative "volume boosting" rather than substantive business applications. Stripe's current move to acquire PayPal is seen as an attempt to bolster its weak consumer-facing (C-side) business after its stablecoin-focused strategies faltered. Meanwhile, PayPal is described as structurally outdated, unable to revive itself through new products like Venmo or PYUSD. The future of payments may lie not in payments themselves but in value-added services like more efficient settlement networks. The author suggests that companies like Stripe and Circle, which are building their own blockchains (Tempo, Arc) and stablecoins, are positioning themselves to eventually profit from high-efficiency settlement systems. These new networks could potentially bypass some traditional banking layers. In conclusion, the article posits that third-party payment is a perpetually fragmented battlefield where scale alone cannot ensure victory. Players must find new models, focusing on efficiency to compete with the entrenched banking system. Stripe's acquisition of PayPal represents a bet on this uncertain future.

链捕手1 h fa

The Eternal Fragments of Money: Third-Party Payment Has No First Principle

链捕手1 h fa

Trading

Spot

Articoli Popolari

Come comprare ONE

Benvenuto in HTX.com! Abbiamo reso l'acquisto di Harmony (ONE) semplice e conveniente. Segui la nostra guida passo passo per intraprendere il tuo viaggio nel mondo delle criptovalute.Step 1: Crea il tuo Account HTXUsa la tua email o numero di telefono per registrarti il tuo account gratuito su HTX. Vivi un'esperienza facile e sblocca tutte le funzionalità,Crea il mio accountStep 2: Vai in Acquista crypto e seleziona il tuo metodo di pagamentoCarta di credito/debito: utilizza la tua Visa o Mastercard per acquistare immediatamente HarmonyONE.Bilancio: Usa i fondi dal bilancio del tuo account HTX per fare trading senza problemi.Terze parti: abbiamo aggiunto metodi di pagamento molto utilizzati come Google Pay e Apple Pay per maggiore comodità.P2P: Fai trading direttamente con altri utenti HTX.Over-the-Counter (OTC): Offriamo servizi su misura e tassi di cambio competitivi per i trader.Step 3: Conserva Harmony (ONE)Dopo aver acquistato Harmony (ONE), conserva nel tuo account HTX. In alternativa, puoi inviare tramite trasferimento blockchain o scambiare per altre criptovalute.Step 4: Scambia Harmony (ONE)Scambia facilmente Harmony (ONE) nel mercato spot di HTX. Accedi al tuo account, seleziona la tua coppia di trading, esegui le tue operazioni e monitora in tempo reale. Offriamo un'esperienza user-friendly sia per chi ha appena iniziato che per i trader più esperti.

354 Totale visualizzazioniPubblicato il 2024.12.12Aggiornato il 2026.06.02

Come comprare ONE

Discussioni

Benvenuto nella Community HTX. Qui puoi rimanere informato sugli ultimi sviluppi della piattaforma e accedere ad approfondimenti esperti sul mercato. Le opinioni degli utenti sul prezzo di ONE ONE sono presentate come di seguito.

活动图片