Disclaimer: Information found on CryptoreNews is those of writers quoted. It does not represent the opinions of CryptoreNews on whether to sell, buy or hold any investments. You are advised to conduct your own research before making any investment decisions. Use provided information at your own risk.
CryptoreNews covers fintech, blockchain and Bitcoin bringing you the latest crypto news and analyses on the future of money.
The nonfungible token (NFT) marketplace OpenSea has stated that it has no knowledge of any evidence suggesting that a former employee was involved in the notorious AnubisDAO rug pull that occurred in 2021, following recent allegations on social media.
In a thread dated October 6 on X (previously Twitter), the anonymous account NFT Ethics tagged OpenSea, prompting a response to claims that its former head of ventures, Kevin Pawlak, is associated with the pseudonymous identity “0xSisyphus” and was engaged in “various questionable business activities.”
1/ Dear @OpenSea, what is your perspective on the fact that your Head of Ventures, Kevin Pawlak, has been implicated in various highly questionable business dealings (e.g., Anubis) and pump & dump schemes under his pseudonymous identity @0xSisyphus (& 0xMagellan)? pic.twitter.com/GzIVLJirLE
— NFT Ethics (@NFTethics) October 6, 2023
Both NFT Ethics and the blockchain analytics account Lookonchain claimed that 0xSisyphus, and by extension Pawlak, played a significant role in promoting the AnubisDAO project to investors shortly before the project redirected the newly acquired funds to various external wallets.
The NFT Ethics thread suggested that Pawlak’s purported involvement in the AnubisDAO rug pull was premeditated in collaboration with other developers and that the proceeds were laundered through the memecoin Pepe (PEPE).
However, a spokesperson for OpenSea informed Cointelegraph that it was not aware of Pawlak’s participation in any such activities, while also mentioning that Pawlak had a “limited scope” during his tenure there.
“Kevin is a former employee who departed the company in June 2023. He had a limited scope while at OpenSea — where he worked in a non-management role. We have no knowledge of his involvement with the projects in question.”
“Additionally, we have no connection to, or information regarding, the projects in question, as they occurred prior to his time at OpenSea,” the company representative stated.
In October 2021, AnubisDAO raised 13,556 Ether (ETH) — valued at $60 million at that time — from cryptocurrency investors. However, approximately 20 hours later, the funds were transferred to multiple different wallet addresses, leading to an immediate loss for the investors.
Related Posts
Blockchain investigator ZachXBT also seemed to dismiss the allegations, describing the thread as “one of the most mid-curve” things he had encountered.
He remarked that much of the thread appeared to base numerous assumptions about 0xSisyphus’ involvement in the alleged rug pull on “unrelated events without facts.”
That thread is one of the most midcurve things I have read. They make many assumptions off unrelated events without facts.
FixedFloat does tons in volume and same with the other exchanges mentioned. Here is the source address of the April 2023 FixedFloat insider PEPE buys I… https://t.co/0kG2M7DNVi— ZachXBT (@zachxbt) September 29, 2023
0xSisyphus is also reported to have previously offered a 1,000 ETH bounty to anyone who could reveal the wallet address that drained the pool and engaged law enforcement in both the United States and Hong Kong, further casting doubt on the recent allegations.
Related: AnubisDAO’s rug-pulled 13.5K ETH washes away on Tornado Cash
“Is Sisyphus at fault for gross negligence for misrepresenting the Anubis team multisig? Absolutely 100%. A civil case is likely possible for victims,” stated ZachXBT.
ZachXBT emphasized that negligence in this context is distinctly different from misappropriating funds from one’s own project. “[As far as I know,] Sisyphus was the only team member communicating with the [Department of Homeland Security].”
“Do you really think they did not scrutinize him first and monitor his activities?” questioned ZachXBT.
He also clarified that the two individuals most likely accountable for the loss of funds during the AnubisDAO incident were two pseudonymous users known only as “Beerus” and “Ersan.”
Magazine: NFT collapse and monster egos feature in new Murakami exhibition
