A proposal to extend token lock-ups to four years has triggered investor backlash at World Liberty Financial. The move raises fresh concerns about governance standards and liquidity rights in politically linked crypto ventures.
This Is World Tyranny, Not World Liberty Financial — Here's Why
— H.E. Justin Sun 👨🚀 🌞 (@justinsuntron) April 15, 2026
This proposal has been packaged as a "governance alignment signal" and a "long-term commitment," but strip away the packaging and what you have is one of the most absurd governance scams I have ever seen. Let me… https://t.co/sJhFMnLWsJ
The plan, опубликован on the project’s governance forum Wednesday, would add two years to the existing lock-up for early participants. Tokens would then unlock gradually over another two years. A key clause states that holders rejecting the proposal could face indefinite lock-ups, effectively restricting exit options.
Does Forced Lockup Undermine Token Holder Rights?
Criticism has centered on whether the proposal violates basic governance norms in decentralized finance (DeFi). Early investors typically expect defined vesting schedules, but indefinite restrictions tied to voting outcomes introduce new risks. The issue echoes past governance disputes where token holders had limited recourse despite nominal voting rights.
Justin Sun, a crypto entrepreneur and reported 4% stakeholder, described the proposal as “one of the most absurd governance scams I have ever seen.” He argued the structure amounts to coercion, adding that his own tokens are currently frozen, preventing participation in the vote. Simon Dedic, founder of Moonrock Capital, said early backers are being “rugged” after expecting liquidity.
All the $WLFI early investors who thought they were sitting on solid profits just got rugged, by the Trump family themselves.
— Simon Dedic (@sjdedic) April 15, 2026
This essentially gives them another shot at squeezing the same lemon they’ve been inflating with hot air for the past two years. Which, what a surprise,… https://t.co/yLSNcfeZlm
The governance dispute coincides with pressure on the WLFI token, which remains at $0.08 after losing more than 75% from its $0.33 peak in September. At the same time, the project’s financial strategy has drawn scrutiny after depositing 5 billion WLFI tokens as collateral to secure a $75 million stablecoin loan on Dolomite. The transaction pushed the platform’s USD1 pool to near full utilization, restricting withdrawals.
Still, the combination of governance friction and liquidity constraints points to deeper structural risks. The next catalyst will be whether token holders can influence the proposal outcome or if enforcement proceeds under contested conditions.
