2025-12-27 15:13:00

#数字资产市场动态 Someone recently questioned the value of our long and short data. To be honest, I didn't plan to respond at first. But since he's been quite active in the comment section, I still want to clarify.

Our product has only been released for half a month, and there are already 263 trial users, of whom 21 have officially applied, with a service fee of $100,000. Who are these users? Basically, they are either industry peers, wealthy investors, or professional technical teams.

Interestingly, some users with lower entry barriers have also started to voice their opinions. But the reality is—if you are trading against our experienced users, the gap is like that between a professional driver and a casual rider; you can't even see their taillights. I understand that reading this might make some people upset, but before speaking out, you should consider whether it's worth it.

We are considering adjusting our strategy to prioritize core users within the ecosystem. For new users entering, the entry standards will be carefully evaluated—this is not exclusion, but a way to ensure community quality. The crypto market is highly competitive, and user stratification is very important.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

7 Likes

Reward
7
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

BTCRetirementFund

· 9h ago

Half a month, 263 users. This data sounds a bit fishy. Hi, I've been in the crypto world for so many years. To be honest, I'm a bit tired of this "threshold theory." Only half a month? And you're already starting to differentiate and treat people differently. That's a bit hasty. $100,000 a year. This price isn't cheap, but the results depend on trading performance. The tail light theory is interesting. Then let's compare data directly. Anyone can talk trash. Honestly, it's still fear of being criticized. Responding this way makes it easier to be caught out. I just want to ask, out of 21 official users, how many actually made money? This set of rhetoric sounds like you're paving the way for yourself. It feels a bit hollow.

View OriginalReply0

GasWhisperer

· 9h ago

ngl the mempool's getting crowded with hot takes from folks who don't even understand fee optimization...

Reply0

rugpull_survivor

· 9h ago

Ha, isn't this just saying that small investors like us don't deserve to have opinions? The $100,000 threshold indeed keeps most people out. It's nicely called "community quality," but isn't it just about wanting big players? I can't even see the taillights... alright, I give up. In half a month, the product has 263 trial users and 21 official applications. The data looks good, but... I just want to ask, how long did it take for these 21 big players to earn back the $100,000 service fee? I've heard the phrase "ensuring community quality" too many times; it's often said in Web3. Why should I believe in something I can't access just because it claims to be awesome? Honestly, I don't quite understand this logic—are the more high-end things less eager to prove their effectiveness externally? I totally understand the feeling of being crushed by the "chosen ones."

View OriginalReply0

Anon4461

· 9h ago

A ticket costs $100,000. Honestly, I just can't understand this logic. --- Basically, it's still about creating a clique. The threshold for user segmentation is just being raised under the guise of a community. --- Wait, hold on. The sample size isn't even large enough, and you're already dividing into levels? --- It seems like they're afraid of being exposed, so they preemptively add a golden shield for themselves. --- 263 people experienced it, 21 paid. With such a low conversion rate, how can they still talk about data quality? --- Think about it from another angle. Truly valuable tools don't need to be explained so much. --- Things meant for professional users, but when the onlookers criticize, they get upset. This reaction is quite genuine. --- A $100,000 long/short data set. If it were really that awesome, big institutions would have already bought it all up. --- Sounds a bit like the confidence of a small-town exam taker. After half a month of experience, they start judging people's character.

View OriginalReply0

BearMarketMonk

· 10h ago

Another self-redemption story of a "chosen one" in the track. In just half a month, 263 users started debating the ecological hierarchy system. Frankly, this is a perfect illustration of survivor bias — before the old waves are wiped out, they are eager to establish rules.

View OriginalReply0