About

About Kaspa Explained.

Kaspa Explained is an independent public reference for understanding Kaspa with clear sources, current-status labels, and no price targets or exchange rumors.

Who, how, why

Method.

Who

Kaspa Explained is independently maintained as a Kaspa-positive research guide. It explains protocol status, tradeoffs, and context with source links.

How

Updates start from the strongest available source for the claim: code, releases, KIPs, research papers, protocol docs, and direct technical context before public summaries or social posts.

Why

The site exists to make Kaspa understandable without confusing shipped network behavior with targeted upgrades, roadmap architecture, research, or community hopes.

Disclosure

Maintainer and conflicts.

This site is independently maintained and Kaspa-positive. It is not an official Kaspa site, not a wallet, not an exchange, not a miner, not a price-target service, and not a paid promotion venue.

The maintainer may hold KAS or use Kaspa ecosystem tools. Treat the site as curated research, not neutral financial advice. Status-sensitive claims should still be checked against primary sources before publication, investment, or production decisions.

Editorial policy

What the site does.

Explain, then label status

Kaspa ideas are separated into what works now, what is targeted, what is roadmap, and what is research. The goal is to make the protocol understandable without treating future architecture as shipped software.

Use stronger sources for stronger claims

Code, releases, KIPs, research papers, protocol documentation, and direct technical posts carry shipped-feature claims. Community articles, interviews, learning libraries, and X posts are useful context but weaker evidence for activation status.

Keep crypto in its lane

The site does not argue that blockchains fix every database, payment, legal, privacy, or real-world verification problem. Kaspa is evaluated where people need one shared record without one operator controlling it.

Corrections

Corrections.

If a status claim is wrong or stale, the correction should update both the visible page and the source trail. When the change matters to readers, the page should say what changed.

Highest priority

Wrong live/roadmap/research status, wrong activation timing, broken source hierarchy, or wording that implies investment advice.

Normal priority

Broken links, unclear explanations, stale comparison wording, glossary gaps, missing cross-links, or diagrams that could be clearer.

Request path

Open a GitHub issue or pull request with the page URL, the exact claim, the stronger source, and the wording that should change.

Disclosures

Boundaries.

Next step

Where to go next.

Use status for shipped-vs-roadmap claims, sources for evidence weight, or Start Here when the reader needs the full crypto foundation first.