When project teams deprioritize holder interests, this is the inevitable outcome. Treating community members as second-class stakeholders while pursuing other agendas rarely ends well. The warning signs were there early on—misaligned incentives, unclear development direction, and decisions that favored insiders over long-term believers. By the time reality sets in, the damage is done. Another once-promising protocol reduced to a cautionary tale about what happens when tokenomics and governance take a backseat to poor management decisions.

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.
  • Reward
  • 3
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
RugpullTherapistvip
· 5h ago
I should have known earlier, this trick is always the same... The team first makes promises, then they prioritize internally, retail investors? Haha
View OriginalReply0
SelfStakingvip
· 5h ago
That's why I never trust projects that are vague about the community from the very beginning.
View OriginalReply0
StakeWhisperervip
· 5h ago
This is the same old story again; the team benefits at the community's expense, I've seen it coming a long time ago.
View OriginalReply0
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
English
  • بالعربية
  • Português (Brasil)
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Español
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Русский
  • 繁體中文
  • Українська
  • Tiếng Việt