Ghost Chain Accusation, Ripple CTO Response, and the Full Debate Explained

The latest XRP versus LINK clash erupted next Zach Rynes took direct aim at the XRP Ledger, calling it an “outdated ghost chain.” His comments didn’t stop there; he dismissed XRP’s long-standing role as a global bridge asset and pointed to weak traction in tokenized assets, noting that XRPL holds less than 1% of the RWA market and less than 0.01% of the stablecoin supply.

This went to the heart of XRP’s story, immediately triggering a strong community response and turning a long-standing rivalry into a new social media war.

The situation worsened when Rynes linked XRP to Ripple’s business strategy. Following Ripple’s $750 million share buyback, he argued that XRP sales are being used to fund company growth, acquisitions and share buybacks, raising questions about whether token holders benefit from this structure.

He put it by saying: Owning XRP could mean funding a company that prioritizes shareholders over token holders. That argument quickly spread across crypto Twitter and provoked sharp reactions.

XRP Votes Push Back Strongly

Ripple CTO David Schwartz responded by calling the criticism logically flawed. He reiterated that XRP sales are part of a long-term, pre-disclosed distribution strategy and added that price declines resulting from such sales could allow investors to accumulate at lower levels.

Lawyer Bill Morgan accused Rynes of having an “unhealthy obsession with XRP,” dismissing the narrative that XRP holders are being sidelined in Ripple’s growth.

XRPL validator Veterinary surgeon framed the response as frustration on Chainlink’s part, while simultaneously defending XRPL’s own order book and automated market maker features.

Voice of the community xrpmickle delivered one of the sharpest counterattacks, claiming that LINK has no economic necessity. He argued that Chainlink’s oracle network is not dependent on the LINK token and called it “ETH-issued vaporware,” stating that even if LINK were to disappear, the network would continue to function.

Chainlink votes fire back

Rynes remained steadfast, calling Ripple’s defense “elite tier gaslighting” and claiming that XRP holders do not share in the company’s benefits. He argued that proceeds from the sale of XRP are used for acquisitions, product development and share buybacks for the benefit of Ripple shareholders.

Crypto analyst Fishy catfish reinforced this position by stating that Ripple sells XRP to fund itself, while Chainlink generates revenue from its protocol and uses it for LINK buybacks, reportedly around $1.1 million per week.

Meanwhile, on the other hand, Rynes also accused an XRP influencer of copying a Chainlink partnership graphic, which originally included integrations with SWIFT, DTCC, Visa and Mastercard, and replacing the branding with

A rivalry that goes back years

Rynes traced the roots of this feud to 2019, tied to competition for institutional adoption. XRP proponents point to Ripple’s size, including more than $100 billion in processed transactions and growing ETF inflows of nearly $1.44 billion.

On the other hand, Chainlink supporters point to integrations with major financial players such as SWIFT, DTCC and JPMorgan Chase.

Crypto Voice Andres added that Ripple operates as a private company raising capital through equity, while XRP acts as a liquidity asset, separating the two roles.

In the meantime, Juxa Meta offered a balanced view, stating that Chainlink currently demonstrates a stronger alignment between protocol activity and token value, while Ripple offers scale and established presence in payments.

No direct rivals, but the war continues

Despite their intensity, both projects operate in different sectors. Chainlink focuses on data, oracles, and interoperability, while XRP is built for payments and settlement. In fact, Ripple’s RLUSD stablecoin already uses Chainlink price feeds.

Even Brad Garlinghouse and Sergey Nazarov have done that appeared publicly on good terms, something their communities do not reflect.

That said, the fact remains that despite the feud, XRP has a significantly higher valuation of $91 billion, compared to LINK’s $7 billion, marking a thirteen times gap between the two. While LINK remains further from its peak, down 81% from its all-time high, while XRP is relatively closer with a decline of 59%.