【Blockchain Rhythm】A well-known token issuance platform recently faced a major legal lawsuit. The law firm reiterated in the latest version of the complaint that this platform, promoted as an “opportunity game,” actually operates like a “manipulated casino.”
According to internal information exposed in the lawsuit, the platform’s co-founder admitted that “most people suffer losses.” What does this imply? The platform’s operational model is inherently highly unfavorable to retail participants.
The plaintiff has raised several core allegations: First, the platform uses a priority fee mechanism to allow certain users to gain an advantage during token launches, creating a clearly unfair competitive environment; second, some crypto opinion leaders promote tokens without disclosing compensation, suspected of false advertising; third, platform leaders “secretly predetermined who would win and who would lose,” extracting huge profits from retail investors.
Although the allegations are quite serious, the court has not yet obtained definitive evidence proving direct profit-making by senior executives. However, the good news is that the judge has approved the plaintiff’s submission of an amended complaint containing 5,000 private messages, which could become key evidence.
This case reflects issues of information asymmetry and platform power imbalance in the current crypto market, warranting industry-wide reflection.
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.
14 Likes
Reward
14
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
SilentObserver
· 18h ago
Same old story, it's the same priority fee mechanism and insider recommendations. I just want to ask, how come these platforms haven't been completely banned yet?
View OriginalReply0
RugpullSurvivor
· 18h ago
Manipulating casinos is the same as what I experienced, all the money was sucked dry by vampires.
I should have known not to believe in priority fees; it's a classic scam to cut the leeks.
Is this the current state of Web3? It's too shady.
Everyone's losing money, only the whales are making profits. I just want to know who the hell the specific users are.
I can't stand false advertising. Those KOLs are all two-faced.
It's always us retail investors who end up as the scapegoats. Damn.
Another one. Many platforms do this and nothing happens.
Secrets that pre-determine wins and losses are truly outrageous.
View OriginalReply0
DaisyUnicorn
· 18h ago
It's the same old trick again. The priority fee mechanism is just MEV harvesting under a different name... Looks like this flower isn't very popular after all.
View OriginalReply0
Rugman_Walking
· 18h ago
Really? Is it the same trick again? The priority fee mechanism is just blatant insider trading.
View OriginalReply0
ProbablyNothing
· 18h ago
It's the same old trick again. The priority fee mechanism is basically outright theft. Why do they get to get on the bus first?
If they're going to scam retail investors, just do it. Don't pretend it's some kind of opportunity or game. Truly pathetic.
Big influencers taking money behind the scenes and pretending to be innocent—there are hardly any clean ones in this industry.
Token issuance platform sued: leaked internal information reveals controversy over priority fee mechanism
【Blockchain Rhythm】A well-known token issuance platform recently faced a major legal lawsuit. The law firm reiterated in the latest version of the complaint that this platform, promoted as an “opportunity game,” actually operates like a “manipulated casino.”
According to internal information exposed in the lawsuit, the platform’s co-founder admitted that “most people suffer losses.” What does this imply? The platform’s operational model is inherently highly unfavorable to retail participants.
The plaintiff has raised several core allegations: First, the platform uses a priority fee mechanism to allow certain users to gain an advantage during token launches, creating a clearly unfair competitive environment; second, some crypto opinion leaders promote tokens without disclosing compensation, suspected of false advertising; third, platform leaders “secretly predetermined who would win and who would lose,” extracting huge profits from retail investors.
Although the allegations are quite serious, the court has not yet obtained definitive evidence proving direct profit-making by senior executives. However, the good news is that the judge has approved the plaintiff’s submission of an amended complaint containing 5,000 private messages, which could become key evidence.
This case reflects issues of information asymmetry and platform power imbalance in the current crypto market, warranting industry-wide reflection.