While reviewing governance discussions here, I found https://www.xdcdao.org/ inoperable; it returns an HTTP 402 error, which I believe typically indicates a lapsed payment with the hosting provider. Before posting, I wanted to understand the timeline and what the outage means for any funds in the system. What I found raises questions that are broader than an unpaid hosting bill.

The timeline (per Internet Archive captures):
The site was serving normally as recently as March 5, 2026, and appears to have gone dark sometime between then and mid-July 2026. Archived captures suggest the front-end was rebuilt and redeployed at least once after the August 2024 launch. Someone was maintaining this site and then, within the last four months, it silently went offline. I am not aware of any public statement regard it's deprecation or abandonment.

What's on-chain (verifiable on xdcscan.io):
People's House deposits flow through the DaofinPlugin contract at 0xE514ca0B19B5bDBe01D60Be0879ed2cf4b2749E2, which forwards all XDC to the DAO treasury at 0xd7BF844A67954437593057b038b221485a2555C3. The record shows seven addresses joined at 10,000 XDC each between August and late 2024, alongside eight 1-XDC deposits consistent with test transactions. Three of the seven members resigned and withdrew--on October 8, November 15, and November 17, 2024--all while the site was operational. The treasury currently holds 40,138 XDC, and nothing has moved since November 17, 2024.
The transaction history shows nothing improper. Funds in equal funds out plus what remains, and the deposits have sat untouched throughout the outage. So this is largely an inquiry regarding stewardship, transparency, and the future function of XDCDAO.

An honest open question about those deposits:
I have not attempted to identify owners of the depositing addresses, and I don't want to assume facts. There are two readings of this data, and they lead to different, but equally important, conversations.
If the depositors are ordinary community members, then four people currently have 10,000 XDC each locked behind a website that no longer exists, with no published alternative for viewing or withdrawing their stake.
If, instead, most deposits came from people involved in building and testing XDCDAO, then the funds-access concern softens, but a different question sharpens: genuine community participation in the network's flagship decentralized governance initiative may have been minimal, and the DAO went dark without anyone noticing in part because there was hardly anyone positioned to notice.
I'd genuinely welcome clarification from anyone who knows which picture is accurate. Both are worth an honest conversation.

How I found the contract addresses — and why that's itself a finding:
I was unable to locate the mainnet contract addresses in any published source. I didn't see them in the launch announcement, the how-to articles here on xdc.dev, the XinFinOrg/osx-daofin repository (whose deployment records cover only Apothem testnet), the daofin-ui repository (which loads them from private build-time variables), or anywhere indexed by search engines. If they were shared somewhere (e.g. a Telegram channel, a Discord, a post I missed) I'd welcome the pointer, and I acknowledge that contract addresses are always technically recoverable on-chain by someone with the right expertise. But neither of those is user-friendly documentation.
I recovered the addresses by extracting an archived copy of the website's JavaScript bundle from the Wayback Machine and verifying candidates against the chain. (One caveat for completeness: the final version of the site's code was not archived, so I cannot rule out that later builds referenced additional contracts; but the chain confirms the 2024 member deposits remain in the treasury above.) The practical standard for a system holding member deposits should be that a depositor of ordinary technical ability can find the contracts from an official, durable source. Today, as far as I can determine, they cannot. And with the front-end dead, there may be no documented path to the two-step resign-and-claim withdrawal process.

Questions for anyone with visibility:

1. Who is responsible for xdcdao.org's hosting and maintenance, and is there a plan and timeline to restore it? Given the site was maintained as recently as this year, this may be as simple as a missed invoice.
2. Will the mainnet contract addresses and ABIs be officially published in a durable location, so depositors can verify their stake and withdraw without depending on a website?
3. Can anyone involved clarify the extent of genuine community participation in the People's House and Masternode Senate? How many proposals were ever put to a vote, and where can that history be viewed? I attempted to view the voting history on one matter I understood was subject to the XDCDAO vote but was not able to find anything.
4. There appears to be recent activity on the Apothem testnet contracts: deposits as recently as April 2026, i.e., around or after the time the production site went dark. Is development continuing? If so, what is the plan for the production governance layer: restore, relaunch, or formally wind down?

Why this matters:
An expired hosting bill is a mundane failure, not a scandal, and the on-chain record is clean. But governance infrastructure is only credible if it is reliably available and independently verifiable. A governance system that can go dark for months without public comment tells us something either about its stewardship or about its adoption; both are worth addressing openly, because both are fixable. The first steps are cheap: state plainly what XDCDAO's status is, publish the addresses and ABIs, and either restore the site or provide a withdrawal guide. Last I knew, XDCDAO was in hands more capable than my own, but I'm available to help in any way that would move things forward.

I'm genuinely interested in answers here, not blame. Tagging @0xbeny, who has been the most consistent and generous voice on XDCDAO in this forum.

WeAreXDC