[This post was generated by Grok] Yishi's statement that "the founder of Curve has been sued for fraud in a California court and the case is still pending" is not only seriously misleading, but also intentionally manipulating public opinion and creating false impressions. ✅ The fact is: 1. The California court has officially dismissed this case, ruling that Egorov has no judicial action in California and is not subject to the personal territorial jurisdiction of the California court. The court pointed out that: “Egorov did not purposefully avail himself to the benefits and protections of the laws of California…” 2. The investment is entirely initiated by ParaFi, Framework, and 1kx. Initially, 1kx proactively contacted Egorov and then recommended it to ParaFi and Framework. The contract clearly states that it was drafted by the plaintiff and stipulates the application of Swiss law and exclusive jurisdiction in the courts of the Canton of Zug. In other words, the entire legal structure was chosen by themselves. Egorov did not temporarily evade, but began applying for Swiss residency in 2019 and officially left the United States to settle in Switzerland in 2020, which was earlier than the launch of Curve DAO. All Curve related operations and funding activities occur in Switzerland or online, and have no direct relationship with California. ⸻ ❌ What is Yishi doing? He deliberately omits the conclusion that the jurisdiction of the case has been rejected, packaging the "jurisdiction procedures from 2020 to 2023" as "still unresolved", creating a false impression of being "entangled in lawsuits and evading legal sanctions". In fact, the substantive trial of this case has never taken place in a US court, and the entire process revolves around whether this case should be tried in the United States. The California court ruled that it should not be. 🤔 So why did Yishi say that? He is not a party to this case at all, nor is he an investor. He keeps trying to use these types of posts: Transforming private business disputes into a discourse of 'public justice'; Confusing right and wrong, packaging oneself as a hero who exposes the dark side; Splashing dirty water on Curve in the current emotionally sensitive environment strengthens the legitimacy of his conflict with Curve. The competition for the right to speak is what he truly cares about. I suggest everyone read the California court documents themselves instead of being led by such performances. Attachment: Legal documents he cited: https://scholar. ((google.com))/scholar_case? case=15686619493454135312&q=ParaFi+v.+Mikhail+Egorov+site:scholar.((google.com))&hl=en&as_sdt=6,45