Exchanges make money mainly through a few ways: transaction fees, slippage, or compliant operations via anti-witch mechanisms. Some people complain that since the underlying logic of perpetual contracts is that exchanges profit from the spread, the anti-witch mechanism becomes particularly awkward—users spend money to participate in trading, so why should they be penalized for being labeled as witch accounts? There is indeed a balancing issue here: platforms need to prevent risks and cheating behaviors, but they also cannot let normal traders pay the price for anti-cheating measures. This contradiction still seems to be unresolved in the operation of the derivatives market.
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.
18 Likes
Reward
18
7
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
DegenWhisperer
· 2025-12-31 13:04
Damn, the anti-witch logic is ridiculous. To put it simply, exchanges just want to profit from the spread while appearing compliant. Why should users pay for their risk control?
View OriginalReply0
LiquidatedDreams
· 2025-12-31 07:35
Well, this anti-witchcraft rhetoric sounds grandiose, but it's actually just another tool for exchanges to harvest retail investors.
View OriginalReply0
wrekt_but_learning
· 2025-12-29 19:01
Damn, this anti-witch mechanism is really outrageous. The exchange profits from the spread and still accuses us of being bots. Who came up with this logic?
View OriginalReply0
wagmi_eventually
· 2025-12-29 18:48
Anti-witchcraft stuff is basically just an excuse for exchanges to shift blame; users are really innocent.
View OriginalReply0
DegenGambler
· 2025-12-29 18:43
Damn, this anti-witch mechanism is just a facade for the exchange. Not only do they profit from the spread, but they also falsely accuse regular traders.
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-74b10196
· 2025-12-29 18:30
This anti-witch mechanism is really clever—charging a fee while calling us witches, double-dipping right here?
View OriginalReply0
GasFeeAssassin
· 2025-12-29 18:24
It's just ridiculous. I pay the transaction fee, and you treat me like a witch? It feels like the exchange just wants to double charge.
Exchanges make money mainly through a few ways: transaction fees, slippage, or compliant operations via anti-witch mechanisms. Some people complain that since the underlying logic of perpetual contracts is that exchanges profit from the spread, the anti-witch mechanism becomes particularly awkward—users spend money to participate in trading, so why should they be penalized for being labeled as witch accounts? There is indeed a balancing issue here: platforms need to prevent risks and cheating behaviors, but they also cannot let normal traders pay the price for anti-cheating measures. This contradiction still seems to be unresolved in the operation of the derivatives market.