2026-01-04 15:29:21

Founder credibility really matters in this space, and it's becoming impossible to ignore. When a project founder has burned bridges with half the community, participation in their fundraising round gets drastically impacted.

The contrast is striking—early on, community members faced heavy criticism for raising concerns about the project. Fast forward to now, and that same project is struggling through a sale with only $400k raised so far, which falls drastically short of their original 3X target. It's a clear signal that damaged relationships and communication breakdowns directly translate into fundraising headwinds.

This scenario highlights why transparency and community trust are non-negotiable assets for any founder launching a token sale or capital raise. Short-term decisions that alienate supporters often come with long-term consequences that show up in deal metrics.

TOKEN-0,32%

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.

19 Likes

Reward
19
9
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MidsommarWallet

· 01-07 13:14

That's why I say many founders simply can't learn to keep their mouths shut and insist on going against the community...

View OriginalReply0

EyeOfTheTokenStorm

· 01-07 03:59

Another case of a founder shooting themselves in the foot. 400k compared to a 3X target—this data says it all... From a market cycle perspective, the speed of trust collapse far exceeds the rebuilding cycle. --- Honestly, I had already quantitatively excluded this kind of project long ago. Community division = fundamental breakdown, fundraising difficulty doubles directly. Short-term losses will be paid for in the long run, and ultimately reflected in the K-line. --- Those in the know can see that the founder’s credibility collapse is even more frightening than a token crash. The 400k figure is not the result; it’s the market’s vote. --- Every time I see such cases, I want to remind newcomers not to be fooled by hype. When the founder’s reputation collapses, no matter how beautiful the white paper, it can’t save the project. Historical data is right here. --- Reasonable suspicion: Will continuing to pour into this round of funding eventually make it impossible to even raise 50w... Once community trust is broken, the cost of repair skyrockets. --- My risk warning: the founder’s credibility is the first line of defense. 400k vs 1.2M, the gap reflects the market’s valuation of the person. Cold but true.

View OriginalReply0

gas_fee_therapist

· 01-05 10:36

哈哈这就是现世报，说难听点就是活该

Reply0

ponzi_poet

· 01-04 15:58

400k funding amount? Haha, that's the price of scammers. --- Founder reputation is really hard to flip; one bad move and it's game over. --- How can there still be people willing to work with such founders? I really don't get it. --- Transparency and trust are the hard currencies; without these, no matter how much money you have, it's useless. --- From being criticized to no one investing, this contrast is truly ironic... --- Basically, it's their own fault for messing up; don't blame the community for being ruthless.

View OriginalReply0

NftDeepBreather

· 01-04 15:58

Ha, this is a classic case of self-inflicted wounds. I’ve long seen problems with this project. --- Same old story, they burn trust and then want to raise funds. Dream on. --- So it turns out that those who doubted them initially were right. Now I understand. --- 400k is far from the 3x target, quite a difference. I’m laughing. --- The relationship between creator and community really determines everything. This time, I got a thorough slap in the face. --- To put it simply, arrogance harms people. Burning bridges ultimately means burning oneself. --- Watching this project go from ignoring advice to no one investing is quite satisfying.

View OriginalReply0

RugDocScientist

· 01-04 15:56

After playing with Web3 for so long, I've never seen a founder offend the community to death and still manage to raise funds smoothly... This time, with a $400k funding round, I can't help but smile.

View OriginalReply0

PermabullPete

· 01-04 15:52

To be honest, the founder's character is really more important than the technology. Once you've been scammed once, don't expect to be fooled again.

View OriginalReply0

TxFailed

· 01-04 15:52

ngl, watched this exact play-out like three times now... founder talks big, community asks questions, founder tells them to shut up, then shocked pikachu face when nobody wants in. classic mistake tbh

Reply0

AltcoinTherapist

· 01-04 15:43

No, that's why I always say not to mix with those arrogant founders; you'll end up getting hurt sooner or later.

View OriginalReply0