2025-12-28 02:48:18

The project team proposed to eliminate fake users, but how should the standards be defined? This question has sparked a heated debate in the community.

Some say, "I operate multiple accounts, so I am a real user. You are the fake ones"—that logic is quite interesting. Others feel wronged: "I only have one account, why am I considered a fake user? At least I am trading with real money."

Even more dramatic are veteran users who deeply participate in the OTC market; overnight, they are sidelined by risk control strategies, and their account assets shrink. They don't understand: "Why am I filtered out just because my trading activity isn't high?"

This reflects a key issue—the definition of fake users should be based on account quantity, trading frequency, or capital scale? Is judging based on a single dimension too arbitrary? The project's original intention is to prevent volume manipulation and cheating, but the lack of clear standards has instead harmed the rights of genuine ecosystem participants.

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.

10 Likes

Reward
10
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

DevChive

· 3h ago

Laughing to death, the project team has already cut all the old investors, and they still say it's to prevent fake volume... --- It's outrageous, assets evaporated overnight, who set this risk control standard? --- Multiple accounts = real users, single account = fake users? This logic is reversed, brother. --- Real trading and real losses are considered fake users, this community is crazy. --- Low trading activity leads to being sidelined, so what about large holders? --- Face-slapping, preventing fake volume ends up harming genuine traders. --- They didn't even clarify the standards before starting to clean accounts, what are they doing? --- OTC veterans are sidelined, the project team is shooting themselves in the foot. --- Number of accounts, trading frequency, capital scale... which one to choose? Anyway, all can take me out. --- Judging from a single dimension, I just want to ask who will take responsibility for this.

View OriginalReply0

TokenDustCollector

· 6h ago

It's really outrageous. Risk control has become a blind box; no one knows when they'll be sidelined.

View OriginalReply0

MoonRocketman

· 7h ago

This risk control logic is really outrageous. Starting to filter users just because the RSI indicator doesn't match? Judging fake users based on a single dimension is no different from blowing smoke blindly. Multiple-dimensional layered analysis is needed to confirm genuine or fake behavior.

View OriginalReply0

tokenomics_truther

· 7h ago

Laughing to death, this standard is really ridiculous. My veteran account hasn't traded for a month and got frozen, huh? --- Multi-account actually becomes real users? What's the logic here, the project team is out of their minds. --- Just found out I might be considered a fake user. I swear, I just have low activity, it doesn't mean I don't have real money. --- Risk control putting old users into the cold storage, this is just chaos, there are no clear standards at all. --- Judging someone as a fake user based solely on trading frequency? What should I do? I just prefer large transactions with low frequency. --- Judging fake users from a single dimension? That's nonsense, it's totally an attempt to shift blame.

View OriginalReply0

AirdropHunterXM

· 7h ago

Turning from an old user to a "fake account" overnight, this logic is really incredible. How does the project team define this?

View OriginalReply0

TokenToaster