Who's To Blame In The Bankless AICC Token Dump Drama? Fingers Point In All Directions

Friendships have ended, loyalties have shifted, and toxic gossip is quickly spreading in the AI x crypto sector due to a suspected token dump by Bankless and other key opinion leaders (KOLs) this past weekend.

The controversy surrounding Aiccelerate DAO and its token $AICC began a few hours after its launch on Saturday, January 11, when whitelisted users began to sell their allocated tokens, leading to the token price crash.

The media project Bankless was immediately called off for selling as it had spent the week prior extensively promoting the project to its large following.

A Big Promise

Aiccelerate DAO is the brainchild of Ejaaz, Markus, and Ropirito - three influential voices in the crypto x AI space.

In its initial post on X, AICC DAO presented itself as a soon-to-be hybrid platform that could support project development, channel investment, and facilitate networking in the most trendy sector of the blockchain industry.

"Our mission is to accelerate the development of decentralized, open source AI and support high potential projects across every ecosystem," it reads.

In this introductory statement, Aiccelerate mentions 25 crypto space A-listers as contributors, including Bankless co-founders David Hoffman and Ryan Sean Adams as outreach advisors.

The listing of top talent and the feverish excitement around the AI x crypto sector (and the associated FOMO) led the crypto community to regard it as a very promising project despite its lack of any fully-developed product.

Days before the launch, hundreds of projects answered Aiccelerate's call for partners on X, and several crypto influencers and KOL discussed the new frontiers that the project would open.

Where Things Went Wrong

Bankless co-founders were invited to the project by Ejaaz, who has been a frequent guest on the project podcast ever since the AI x crypto trend surfaced.

Like other whitelisted investors, each invested 5 SOL in initial seed capital, while through Bankless Ventures, they committed 2 SOL.

Rather than keeping the tokens allocated to it in turn for its investment, Bankless Ventures began to sell the tokens immediately.

Adams claims the sale only happened because Ben Lakoff, a partner of Bankless Ventures and the one responsible for managing its portfolio, was in a "mindset of trading a local high" and didn't know that the AICC tokens weren't up for sale.

The Bankless team also blamed the founders for moving too fast in setting up their shop and forgetting to impose vesting periods and other crucial mechanisms along the way:

"To be fair to Ben […] the AICC DAO communicated no vesting requirements or obligations to any participants," said Adams.

Aiccelerate founder Ejazz, who appeared on the Bankless podcast five times in the past month, also blamed himself and his team.

In a mea culpa statement on X, he said they were "blown away" by the positive response about the project, leading them to get "swept up in excitement."

"Things exploded so quickly & before we blinked, things had gotten out of hand. That's on us for not preparing accordingly," he admitted.

Is The Community Exaggerating, or Is Bankless Gaslighting?

Co-founder of the All Up podcast, Andy was among the first to start asking questions, and he effusively demanded explanations from the Bankless team following the so-called dump.

"Is this what they call a "fair distribution" in crypto? Is this what Bankless stands for? So many questions for what in the world these guys thought would be the outcome of this idea."

After his post, the situation went viral.

Under pressure from him and other angry voices in the community, Bankless VC bought back the tokens it had sold.

Their redemption act was, however, insufficient to calm the storm of public outrage because they not only repurchased the token at a discount but also showed profound inefficiency (one part of the company didn't know what the other was doing).

Several community members also accused them of gaslighting the community and trying to avoid responsibility. One user said, "This industry is rife with cowards who can't take responsibility."

Others accused them of only going back on their purchase due to public pressure.

"These "Founders" are just bunch of crypto gambling degenerates without any kind of vision or integrity," commented another.

"It's a reminder of how hard it is to be part of this market when you're not on the inside," noted another.