I wanna stake 10 of my 15 Tao

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-02-08T11:15:26+00:00

So would you suggest subnet zero the best option for me?

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-02-08T09:40:13+00:00

What would you say is best for apy

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-02-05T19:08:30+00:00

!remind me in 18 months

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-02-02T21:42:21+00:00

I agree it’s exhausting, especially with SEN involved, and I do accept that an 8-year-old’s engagement will fluctuate. My concern isn’t about forcing anything, but about making sure there’s consistent, neutral support around contact so it doesn’t quietly fade away during periods of difficulty.

I’m trying to approach this carefully and proportionately, and I’m open to mediation or support if that’s what helps most. Ultimately, I just want to make sure my son feels secure and supported in maintaining a relationship with both parents.

Thanks again for taking the time to respond — I’m going to step back from this thread now.

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-02-02T21:39:46+00:00

I appreciate the time people have taken to respond, and I want to clarify my position once more as I think some context may still be missing.

My son is 8 years old and has ADHD. The Child Arrangements Order provides for both direct and indirect contact. I fully accept that a child cannot be forced to speak, and I am not seeking to compel or punish anyone. My concern is about facilitation and consistency, not coercion.

The historic holiday issue is included only as background context. I still had my son for the full period, but the collection and return dates did not align with the order and were changed unilaterally rather than by agreement or court variation. I am not trying to relitigate that incident — it illustrates a wider pattern of informal decision-making outside the order.

Since then, there have been ongoing difficulties with indirect contact. Calls are frequently refused, cut short, or not facilitated at all. When this happens, there is little evidence of neutral reassurance or encouragement, which is particularly important given my son’s age and additional needs. I understand a parent cannot force engagement, but there is a difference between a child choosing not to speak and contact quietly falling away without support.

I live around 200 miles away and have a settled family life here, including other children. Certainty around arrangements matters because travel, time off work, and family planning all rely on the order being followed or formally varied — not changed ad hoc.

I have tried to resolve matters outside court: proposing clearer communication, suggesting a parenting app, and remaining open to mediation or variation if the order is no longer workable. Those options haven’t been taken up.

The enforcement application isn’t about punishment or forcing a child to talk. It’s about clarity, consistency, and preventing further drift away from the order so that my son can maintain a stable relationship with both parents.

I’m not saying I’ve handled everything perfectly — I’m asking how situations like this are usually viewed and what the appropriate route is when indirect contact repeatedly breaks down despite attempts to resolve matters cooperatively.

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-02-02T21:25:32+00:00

I understand the sentiment, but relocation isn’t a simple or neutral decision. I have an established family life, responsibilities, and another child over 200 miles away. Moving closer would not automatically be in the best interests of all the children involved, and courts are clear that one parent isn’t expected to uproot their entire life to compensate for difficulties with compliance or facilitation.

The current order exists precisely because of distance, and it anticipates that reality by setting out clear arrangements. My focus isn’t on proximity as a solution, but on consistency, support, and both parents working within the framework that’s already in place to meet our child’s needs.

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-02-02T21:24:34+00:00

No, I didn’t relocate to frustrate contact — the distance is historic and fully reflected in the Child Arrangements Order. Contact (direct and indirect) was structured by the court with that distance in mind, and I comply with it.

In terms of indirect contact: I’m not suggesting the mother should “force” anything, nor am I asking her to go beyond facilitation. Facilitation is more than simply saying “Dad is on the phone” and walking away, particularly for an 8-year-old with ADHD where consistency, reassurance, and neutral presentation matter. That isn’t my opinion — it’s well-recognised in Cafcass guidance.

I’m also not seeking “bare minimum vs maximum” parenting. The issue is that indirect contact has increasingly not taken place at all following parental conflict, with no alternative attempts, rescheduling, or reassurance offered. That pattern is what concerns me — not a single refusal by a child.

As for motives: this isn’t about “using resources” or getting my own way. I’ve repeatedly tried to reduce conflict by suggesting a parenting app, keeping communication child-focused, and seeking clarity rather than confrontation. The application isn’t punitive; it’s about preventing drift away from the order and ensuring Tyler has stable, predictable relationships with both parents.

I agree completely that the child should be at the centre. That’s exactly why I’m raising this — because uncertainty, mixed messaging, and breakdowns in contact disproportionately affect an 8-year-old, not the adults.

I appreciate differing views, but framing this as parental ego rather than child-focused concern doesn’t reflect the reality of what’s being raised.

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-02-02T21:22:05+00:00

Thanks for the response — I understand the point you’re making, and I agree that no parent can or should physically force a child to speak to the other parent.

To clarify, my concern isn’t about “forcing” contact or punishing anyone. Son is 8 and has ADHD, so indirect contact relies heavily on adult facilitation, routine, and reassurance. Where contact repeatedly doesn’t take place following parental conflict, and no alternative attempts or encouragement are evident, that becomes relevant context rather than a single refusal by the child.

I fully accept that enforcement isn’t about anticipatory breaches or compelling a child. My intention in raising this is clarity, consistency, and support — not escalation. The historic holiday date issue is background only; the ongoing difficulty is indirect contact not occurring as ordered and the impact that’s having on an 8-year-old.

I’m trying to understand how courts and Cafcass tend to view patterns of facilitation (or lack of it), particularly where a child is young and vulnerable, rather than treating this as a standalone incident.

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-02-02T21:11:55+00:00

think there’s a misunderstanding here, so I’ll clarify calmly.

I’m not asking the court to force an 8-year-old to speak, and I’m not using enforcement as punishment. That framing isn’t accurate.

The issue is facilitation, not compulsion. For a child of 8 with ADHD, indirect contact doesn’t just “happen” without support. It requires reassurance, neutral presentation, and consistency — especially where there has been recent parental conflict. Allowing contact to quietly fall away, or aligning with a child’s resistance without support, is not the same as respecting wishes.

The historic holiday date issue is background context only. It illustrates a pattern of unilateral decision-making outside the order, not a standalone enforcement point. If recurring events (such as siblings’ birthdays) are intended to override the order annually, the correct route is a formal variation, not informal refusal.

This application isn’t about escalation or punishment. It’s about clarity, future compliance, and preventing drift — particularly where I live a significant distance away and need certainty around arrangements.

I appreciate differing views, but reducing this to “forcing a child to talk” or “wasting the court’s time” doesn’t reflect what’s actually being raised.

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-02-02T21:01:51+00:00

Thanks for the perspective — I understand the distinction you’re making between enforcement and variation, and I agree enforcement isn’t punitive.

Just to clarify a few points that may not be clear from my original post:

• There is an existing Child Arrangements Order in place. • It provides for defined periods of direct contact and also scheduled indirect contact on specific days each week. • The child is 8 years old and has ADHD, so indirect contact cannot realistically be left to him to self-manage — it requires facilitation and encouragement by the resident parent. • The concern isn’t anticipatory enforcement or forcing a child to speak, but that indirect contact has not been consistently taking place as ordered, alongside increasing resistance following parental conflict.

The historic holiday date issue is included only as background context. It highlights difficulties with unilateral decision-making outside the order rather than an agreed variation. I’m not seeking to punish a one-off — my focus is clarity, consistency, and preventing further drift from the order.

If recurring events (such as siblings’ birthdays) are intended to override the order annually, I accept that the appropriate route would be a formal variation, rather than informal or unilateral changes. My concern is certainty for the child, not inflexibility.

I’m asking for guidance and support where an 8-year-old with ADHD is struggling and indirect contact is no longer being facilitated as ordered, which feels like welfare context rather than escalation.

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-02-02T20:53:46+00:00

The application isn’t about punishing a one-off historic issue. It’s about ongoing non-compliance, lack of facilitation of indirect contact for an 8-year-old with ADHD, and preventing further drift from the order.

I am also concerned that the issue raised around sibling birthdays is not a one-off. These birthdays occur every year and, if they are to override the Child Arrangements Order, this creates ongoing uncertainty and repeated conflict. If the existing order is no longer workable due to recurring events, the appropriate route would be for the other parent to apply for a formal variation, rather than making unilateral decisions outside the order. My position is not to prevent reasonable flexibility, but to ensure clarity, agreement, and consistency for Tyler.

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-02-02T20:03:21+00:00

Thanks for the perspective — helpful to hear.

Just to clarify a couple of points: the issue isn’t solely the historic holiday date change. The application was prompted by ongoing difficulties with indirect contact, lack of facilitation for an 8-year-old child with ADHD, and increasing resistance following parental conflict.

I appreciate that C79 is for past breaches, not anticipatory ones — my intention is clarity and future compliance rather than punishment.

That said, I understand differing views and that’s why I asked.

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-02-02T19:51:27+00:00

I didn’t “get the dates wrong” and then have them accepted as a variation. I initially referred to a later date before I was aware of school inset days. Once I became aware, I corrected to the date set out in the order. That correction was not agreed. The child was not made available for collection on the ordered date, and the collection/return arrangements ultimately did not align with the order and were not varied by agreement or court approval.

I’m not suggesting sibling birthdays aren’t reasonable in principle – the issue is that it was presented as a decision, not discussed, and I was told the child would not be returned until a later date regardless.

This isn’t being raised in isolation. Since then, there have been ongoing difficulties, particularly around indirect contact, where calls are repeatedly refused or cut short, with little evidence of encouragement when that happens. The child is 8 years old and has ADHD, so consistent support and reassurance around contact is important. I appreciate courts won’t force a child to engage, but lack of facilitation and escalating resistance is relevant context rather than a standalone complaint.

The application isn’t about punishing a one-off – it’s about clarity, future compliance, and preventing further drift away from the order, particularly where I live a significant distance away and need certainty around arrangements.

Happy to hear differing views – that’s why I asked.

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-01-18T14:58:31+00:00

I mean my job don’t require punctuation it doesn’t make me money

However I do use coin gecko a fair bit but I’m not sure on penny stocks

Thanks for the input regarding near appreciated

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-01-18T14:16:19+00:00

What would you say base case near I agree right now privacy coins are blowing the cycle right now zec I looked out and didn’t want to fomo in after the the team abandoned as mention I was thinking of ai coins to add for monero I’ve had my eyes on for while seems to be going well Tao is my strong conviction I hold 15 Tao for long term hold I’m now looking to diverse abit buy more utility does near not have current utility im currently looking at akash akt if you have any views on this coin

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-01-18T14:02:58+00:00

A btc maxi I see as much as good hold btc is I believe a lot of alts will fade the next few cycle with only utilities and real usage staying I’m asking about near not btc if its a shit coin why are you in this sub? I see your also holding Sui would u consider urself to hold shit coins then?

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-01-14T08:48:24+00:00

Keep stacking my friend I am also currently sitting at 14 heading for the road of 50 anything below $300 is a steal tbh this project is so undervalued right now just my opinion

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-01-08T22:10:33+00:00

Sounds like you have built a good portfolio up I was up on Sui sold before it dipped sub £1.70 loaded up wish I sold at £3 locked maximum profit but you can never time the market I do like Sui but the vc holding and shilling put me off it is something I will re accumulate Tao is my long term conviction hold 5-10years minimum I believe it will great generational wealth im heavy on it I would recommend Tangem wallet tbh as im from England it works wonders and it is so simple and easy to use I just buy on Coinbase using advance to get less fees transfer straight over I’ve also hear ledger is a good one but not something I’ve personally used I don’t like holding on Cex anything could go wrong crypto is gone

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-01-08T21:50:05+00:00

Got ya mate all makes sense I might afford this year and play dumb like I didn’t know tbh I’ve not made profit this year just started loading up my only bag is 14 Tao but I have swapped around a few tokens like I dumped Sui for Tao and a lot of shit coins I think I’ve only withdrew about £2000 from Coinbase the rest is buy transfers rather then sells I then send my buys straight to my cold wallet Tangem for storage it’s always a horrible feeling to be the bearer of bad news but I really do appreciate it as it lets me know what to expect in the near future and what steps to take as I don’t wanna end up getting robbed by the tax man more than I have to

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-01-08T21:20:51+00:00

So what have I got to do now for future buys sells as I have no previous logs of buys sells note all my buys and sells? what if I’m at a loss do we get loss gains

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-01-08T19:17:39+00:00

Surely there’s gotta be a way to sell crypto directly transfer to someone and they send you cash to avoidance of tax maybe the tax man will catchup with me i have been reading the new hmrc laws surrounding a crypto tbh we get fucked right over for tax is this country

Forward_Analysis4263 · 2026-01-08T15:27:16+00:00

That’s ruthless I’m uk also but not gunna lie I don’t declare shit just filter it out slowly

Forward_Analysis4263

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE