2026-01-07 19:24:42

Recently, I've seen quite a few voices criticizing the new coin listing strategies of certain leading exchanges. Honestly, each platform has its own logic for choosing. Different positions mean different considerations—some pursue stability and compliance, others want to seize the opportunity, and all of these make sense. Instead of pointing fingers at each other, it's better to admit that everyone is crossing the river by feeling the stones. The market is changing, user demands are evolving, and our understanding of risk is also shifting. Inevitably, there will be controversies and trial and error in this process. The key is to loosen up and take action, be more tolerant, and judge less. True evolution isn't about one completely overpowering the other, but about each exploring and learning from each other. Focus on doing your own thing well, refining your products, and solidifying user experience, and the market will naturally provide the answer.

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
9
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

OnchainDetectiveBing

· 9h ago

This rhetoric sounds nice, but frankly, being prudent and compliant is never an either-or issue with seizing the first-mover advantage. It's easy to say, but when it comes to spending money, you'll know which one to choose. Exploring on your own is fine, but the premise is that users aren't being exploited. Refining the product is too vague; the key is who can make money. Walking on stones across the river sounds comfortable, but it's really pioneers exploring the way and later followers picking up the bargains.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidatorFlash

· 9h ago

Playing with stones to cross the river? The data speaks for itself. When the liquidation rate soared to 23.7% last year, no one was still talking about inclusiveness. --- The core of the new coin launch strategy is essentially setting risk control thresholds. Whoever dares to lower KYC thresholds is betting that leverage ratios won't trigger. --- Compliance and stability vs. seizing the opportunity. In simple terms, the risk coefficient of lending positions differs by a factor of 2.3. Can they learn from each other? --- Go all out and do it, but in the end, it's the retail investors' collateral ratio that bears the brunt. I've seen this happen too many times. --- Does the market give the answer? The liquidation wave last year certainly wasn't a warm learning moment. --- Exploration is fine, but don't experiment with users' leverage ratios. Is that too much to ask?

View OriginalReply0

HashBrownies

· 15h ago

That's what they say, but the ones truly daring to all-in on new coins are still those seasoned investors who have taken losses before. Nice words, but it all depends on one's ability. Feeling your way across the river? Well, some platforms have already fallen into the river. Tolerance is fine, but my U isn't that tolerant. Focusing on good products is correct, but it's really hard to evaluate new coins. Who can survive until the end in this round is what really matters.

View OriginalReply0

MetaMaskVictim

· 19h ago

That's very true, it still depends on your own risk preference. Exchanges are each doing their own thing, no wonder. Stability and aggressiveness must coexist. Basically, it's about trial and error; no one should laugh at anyone. When it comes to launch strategies, just focus on doing your own thing. Be more tolerant; after all, the market ultimately has the final say. The saying is rough but the truth is sound; the metaphor of crossing the river by feeling the stones is excellent. It's really just that some people want to be conservative, and others want to take risks. Don't compete anymore, each go their own way. That said, it still depends on who actually does better. I agree with mutual learning, but in reality... Compliance and stability are still more important than anything else.

View OriginalReply0

UncleWhale

· 01-07 19:54

That's right, instead of arguing, it's better to see who lasts longer. --- Compliance and speed are originally a balancing act; there's no absolute answer. --- The saying "crossing the river by feeling the stones" hits the mark; it's all about trial and error. --- Let's be more tolerant, everyone. Who hasn't made mistakes before? --- The market indeed has a voice, but you have to live until then. --- Refining the product is not a bad idea; it's much better than a shouting match. --- Different approaches have their pros and cons; it's no fun to insist on a winner. --- I agree, more learning and less tearing down. It's not easy for everyone right now.

View OriginalReply0

liquidation_watcher

· 01-07 19:45

You're so right. Instead of complaining, it's better to focus on getting things done.

View OriginalReply0

ThesisInvestor

· 01-07 19:38

It's one thing to say that, but the market never tolerates lagging players. --- Steady and compliant sounds good, but those who seize the opportunity are already making a fortune. --- Feeling your way across the river? My friend, some people have already gone ashore. --- It sounds nice, but in reality, it depends on whose risk control is more solid. --- Learning from each other is good, but someone has to win first. --- Tolerance is one thing, but if my coins get wrecked, will you compensate? --- Go all out? Easy to flip over. --- There's nothing wrong with saying to improve the product, but the real question is whose product is truly well-made. --- So, at the end of the day, it's all about strength. --- Exploring on your own is fine, just don't screw over retail investors. --- Differentiation doesn't mean having no bottom line; this boundary must be clear.

View OriginalReply0

GateUser-c799715c

· 01-07 19:33

There's nothing wrong with that; everyone is pretty much the same when feeling their way across the river. Compliance and innovation are inherently two different paths; don't insist that one must win and the other must lose. The real test lies in product experience and risk control—if these two are well done, everything else is easy to say.

View OriginalReply0