2026-01-12 07:27:56

Projects like LISA are commonplace. Currently, it still maintains a market capitalization of several tens of millions of dollars, but the tactics are very clear— as long as someone dares to buy in at a low price, the project team will dare to dump their chips. That's why many retail investors keep buying the dip and end up losing more and more; behind it is this kind of "harvesting the leek" scheme at work.

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.

7 Likes

Reward
7
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MonkeySeeMonkeyDo

· 5h ago

Buying in at a low price means getting cut, this broken trick has been played out.

View OriginalReply0

DaoGovernanceOfficer

· 5h ago

tbh the governance structure here is completely opaque... how are token holders supposed to vote on treasury allocation when devs can just dump whenever? *sigh* this is exactly why we need better voting mechanisms—quadratic funding would've prevented this entire mess. the data suggests projects without transparent on-chain governance end up like this 🤓

Reply0

HalfPositionRunner