On August 1, 2025, @publius_val opened a slash on Ethos against @heycape_ titled “Undisclosed Paid Promotions for Play-to-Earn Game.” Two days later, on August 3, 2025, the vote ended inconclusive: a 50/50 split between slash and defend.

The case showed how Ethos handles a dispute between two established accounts, and what happens when the community can’t agree. It also became the most commented and voted-on slash since Ethos was created.

Two reputable accounts on opposite sides

On Ethos, accounts have reviewers and vouchers, and each account has a credibility score. A slash is a public challenge to an account’s credibility, put to a community vote.

In this case, Ethos noted that both accounts were rated reputable. The slash didn’t only put @heycape_ on the line. According to Ethos, 73 reviewers and 29 vouchers of @heycape_ risked their own credibility score if the slash was confirmed. Backing someone on Ethos ties part of your reputation to theirs, so a confirmed slash would have reached the people who had spoken up for @heycape_.

The case @publius_val made

The slash centered on paid promotional work for a play-to-earn game that @heycape_ allegedly did not disclose. In the slash, @publius_val wrote:

“Someone with close to 50k followers should know that not disclosing their paid promotional work, in this case a pay-to-earn game many already describe as scammy, is wrong.”

They added:

“Influencers shouldn’t need rules explained to them to understand ethical vs unethical behavior.”

The argument rested on audience size and responsibility: an account with that reach, in @publius_val’s view, should know that undisclosed paid promotion is a problem, especially for a game many people already regarded with suspicion.

How the vote ended

On August 3, 2025, Ethos reported the result:

• Outcome: inconclusive, with votes split 50/50 between slash and defend
• Participation: the most commented and voted-on slash since the creation of Ethos
• Effect on scores: neither party lost credibility score, because the vote failed to meet the 40/60 threshold

Because the threshold wasn’t met, @heycape_ kept their score, and so did @publius_val. The 73 reviewers and 29 vouchers who had backed @heycape_ were not affected either.

What the result showed

A record turnout that still landed on an even split suggests the community was genuinely divided on the question. The threshold meant that a divided vote left everyone’s score where it was, rather than letting a narrow margin decide a case this contested.

This story first appeared on X.