[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]

@KamBenbrik Avatar @KamBenbrik Kam 🌑

Kam 🌑 posts on X about inflation, blockchain, solana, cosmos the most. They currently have XXXXX followers and X posts still getting attention that total XXXXXX engagements in the last XX hours.

Engagements: XXXXXX #

Engagements Line Chart

Mentions: X #

Mentions Line Chart

Followers: XXXXX #

Followers Line Chart

CreatorRank: XXXXXXX #

CreatorRank Line Chart

Social Influence #

Social category influence finance XX% cryptocurrencies XX%

Social topic influence inflation #120, blockchain #104, solana #1201, cosmos #576, exchanges 20%, staking 20%, validator 20%, hub 20%, cosmos hub XX%

Top accounts mentioned or mentioned by @zmanian @nearprotocol @chorusone @joe4deadcat @imanntz44 @daokwondo @daytrader888 @valardragon @thinkwhysly

Top assets mentioned Solana (SOL)

Top Social Posts #

Top posts by engagements in the last XX hours

"The situation on @NEARProtocol: - There was a governance proposal to reduce the inflation rate by XX% - The proposal didnt get enough votes from validators and failed because it didnt reach the threshold - The NEAR team still decided to implement this change in the next upgrade - Now if validators upgrade theyre forced to accept this change in inflation even though the proposal initially failed due to a lack of votes Governance is broken @ChorusOne decided not to upgrade to prevent bad behaviors like this from happening"
X Link @KamBenbrik 2025-10-22T15:41Z 2869 followers, 29.5K engagements

"Not at all we supported SIMD228 on Solana which would have decreased inflation by up to 80%. Its really not about economics its about the way these changes are implemented. A large portion of validators arent very careful when it comes to upgrades they upgrade simply because its an upgrade. Implementing such changes at the software level and leaving validators the choice to upgrade or not isnt a good design. Regarding Near being young I disagree: its as old as Solana or Avalanche which have meaningful traction. It makes sense for a network like Solana to decrease inflation given the activity"
X Link @KamBenbrik 2025-10-22T22:14Z 2868 followers, 1707 engagements

"That issue mostly concerns exchanges and investors who decided to run a validator. Most staking businesses usually dont have legal issues (see Cosmos chains). There was enough voting power outside of these to reach quorum. Governance on Near is broken and implementing changes in the software and force validators to upgrade or not isnt a solution"
X Link @KamBenbrik 2025-10-22T16:47Z 2853 followers, XXX engagements

"Thats not true it depends on what stage the blockchain is at. We supported the decrease in inflation on Solana because we thought the blockchain was mature enough to generate meaningful revenues from MEV and fees. On Cosmos chains validators have voted in favor of decreasing inflation for multiple networks (Cosmos Hub Osmosis etc)"
X Link @KamBenbrik 2025-10-22T22:20Z 2868 followers, XX engagements