Micheal, first thank you for asking. I think getting on binance or coinbase is great if it happened naturally because we meet the qualifications like in the real world exchange listings. The 7 issues I have are:

One (1) spending $2.5 million to be listed on each of their exchanges is a form of payola. I think the whole concept of paying such a large amount to gain access is questionable legally in general.

Two (2) I realize the purpose of this for a lister is to give "value" to the listing company's token, but the reality is most companies our size and scale are simply listing to get a "pump" in price. Some of those companies can translate the attention via a pump into legit customers and participants in their ecosystem; however a large % of those listing companies are simply using this as a liquidity opportunity. (either to raise funds or exit bad investments for their large stakeholders).

Three (3) I'm not happy at all at spending close to 100m SPS to get this kind of exposure. Even if I felt that the first 2 issues could be overcome, I still would be unhappy with using $2.5m in DAO funds to provide a pump so people can exit at a higher price. If they want to exit, then I think that's fine but spending $2.5m of our treasury funds to get them a higher price is not something I feel is good.

Four (4) We still haven't created a user experience that will retain the new customers we get. So I think any marketing expenses at this time are a big waste because we aren't finished with solving the problems we had the last time. We have already shown exactly what happens when we bring a lot of people in and then can't retain them at a reasonable rate. So I would be against spending any money that would result in no net gain over anything more than a short term pop in players.

Five (5) There's no analysis at all by the proposal, which gives us no useful information as to what to expect. We only have arguments such as "this is a new world, go big or go home" or "this is crypto and we have to adapt to the new rules or die". Or worse, "all the other crypto companies are doing it, if we don't then we will never gain acceptance".

On point number 5, if players were told it cost $25m or even $250m, they would still be able to apply the same logic and make the same arguments. So does that mean that any amount requested is ok to spend? Does the DAO not care about being good allocators of their capital?

Six (6) We will lose credibility to the outside world as well as to ourselves if we make a decision based on the 5 points above. If we end up getting 2/3rds to support such a proposal, then it would say a lot about our future in my opinion.

It would say to me that we the DAO don't care if this is ethical, if we are artificially creating a pump , if we waste DAO funds to do it, and if we do not do any actual real analysis. Further it would say to me that many people are looking for an easy exit liquidity event. Obviously that's not everyone, but it would be the only way I could justify such a decision (if I didn't care about the DAO funds and just wanted a higher price to get liquid).

Seven (7) Finally, I think it would rip apart the long term player base that has held this community together for so long through 2 brutal bear markets. I am positive I would sell out if this type of artificial pump occurred, and I'm sure there would be many others that would as well. They might not admit it, but I believe you would have a ton of exits created by this. IMO, this would be a far different community after such an event if it doesn't happen naturally and when the time is proper.

Again I note that I don't mind people selling, I do mind spending our precious DAO funds to get them a better price if they want to leave.

Finally if we have our act together with the new player experience and we are retaining players we get, and we are not giving away SPS at $0.03, but instead its at $1 as you suggested, then I think we would have the funds to take a chance. The reasons are #1 is less of a % of our assets, #2 we would be ready to capitalize on the investment, and #3 by definition we have proved our worth to the investment world because our token went up without any artificial means. That makes us legit imo, and THEN an investment into the bigtime would carry the proper credibility. (its why many small companies stay private before listing in the real world stock market exchanges)

So Michael, I could deal with some of these negatives if they weren't so many. But in my eyes this is clearly not the right time to do this, and I would be scared of what will happen as a result.

ps... I had some people question me about why I would "threaten to quit" if it passes. I'd like to draw the distinction versus people that routinely throw "fits" and try to extort a vote their way. . I'm not mad at anyone if it passes, nor will I lose out if it happens. In fact I think in 2024 I will make far more if this passes. I won't gaslight people and taunt them if it passes, nor will I be salty or sour.

I will simply be disappointed that it passed because I believe I know the ramifications, and for me those ramifications will be a change in what I do every day and what I've cared about for the last 6 years. But I won't be salty or negative, I will still wish everyone the best and hope I was wrong so everyone after me will still do really well.