The hierarchy in the Crypto world has become an unavoidable reality.

Recently, I have seen reports of some major industry events, which have given me a new understanding of the Crypto ecosystem. One feeling is that age indeed changes people’s perspectives on things. Another deeper feeling is that I didn’t expect the internal hierarchy within the Crypto circle to be so clear-cut already.

The reason for this observation mainly stems from various chaotic phenomena at certain industry conferences. Those opinion leaders supported by top-tier institutions often do things at these events that are far more “spectacular” than their actual contributions—misconduct, false promises, and various seemingly “breaking the circle” actions. These have become hot topics, even more widely circulated than genuine technical discussions and project developments.

But if you understand the logic of KOLs, you’ll suddenly realize: Look, my status is enough to be flown to top events; look, we appear at the most important industry gatherings; look, we can share the stage with industry leaders. All of this is conveying the same message—we are different, we are superior.

And the most painful question is: Are the revenues of large exchanges contributed by these KOLs, or by the ordinary users they look down upon?

An Already Established “Imperial Examination System”

From this perspective, the structure of the Crypto circle becomes very clear:

Top-tier exchanges control resources, set rules, and support KOLs to shape public opinion. Retail investors look up to these industry “gurus,” dreaming of one day joining this circle. This is very much like the ancient imperial examination system—seemingly open and fluid on the surface, but in reality, the rules have long been written by the top players.

You either accept the rules and integrate into the system; or become a marginalized outsider. There is no third way.

So you can see that project teams take pride in gaining favor from leading capital, because this is the credential to enter the “system.” As for the project itself, it becomes a secondary concern—the secondary market will handle that automatically.

The “Decline” of KOLs—From Strength to Traffic

Over the years, I’ve also noticed another change: in the past, KOLs at least had real skills and tangible achievements, making people feel they truly had ability. But now, KOLs care more about creating topics and attracting attention; whether they have real skills is no longer important.

As long as they can get others to notice them, even if they are met with criticism, it doesn’t matter—black and red are still red, toxic traffic is still traffic. Various “account-raising streams,” “trolling streams,” “reversal streams” emerge endlessly, the value of quality content is being devalued, and sensational content’s ROI is increasing.

Behind this shift, it reflects a distorted value system within the entire ecosystem.

The Dilemma of Retail Investors: Three Months in the Circle Decide Everything

Many newcomers to the Crypto circle are not driven by the desire to double their money, but by the wish to turn things around, escape the cycle, and cross the social strata. This desire itself is understandable, but the reality is:

All their years of experience in other industries can’t compete; why should someone with zero foundation in Crypto be able to win?

Sadly, most new entrants follow a surprisingly consistent trajectory:

First step: deposit funds. This is the most dangerous moment. Because in the eyes of scammers, newcomers are the “fattest” retail investors—haven’t lost money yet, still have cash in their pockets. Instead of painstakingly harvesting retail investors, they might as well cut them off at the moment they enter the circle. Many people expose their novice status immediately after depositing, then get led into gambling with fake profit signals. Those who initially wanted to hold coins end up becoming gamblers, losing everything in the end.

According to exchange data, the effective lifespan of new users is only three months. This means within these three months, they either lose everything or admit defeat and exit.

Those who survive this big gamble are no longer retail investors, but true professional traders—and such people are extremely rare.

Even more ruthless are those involved in Ponzi schemes and pump-and-dump schemes. Someone leads them in, only to find they are not really playing in the Crypto circle, but in a capital game. When they can no longer withdraw, they realize they’ve been scammed, but by then, it’s too late.

The Gap in Cognition Is More Deadly Than the Capital Gap

Even if you go smoothly and learn the basics, you’ll find that: there is always some small altcoin that can harvest you. Moreover, people who enter the Crypto circle tend to have a gambling mentality; many fall at this hurdle.

Few realize “I want to make money from this industry, not just keep throwing money in.” Many only understand this after losing everything, when their principal has already been almost exhausted.

Some start participating in airdrops and yield farming, which is indeed a smarter choice. But now, airdrops are no longer as easy to grab as before—it’s all points-based, requires interaction, and the thresholds are gradually rising. Current airdrops test research ability and capital reserves more than ever, making it increasingly difficult for ordinary people to participate.

So, in theory, there are countless paths, but practically, none are truly feasible.

If you suggest they hold Bitcoin, they might say “It’s too expensive.” But I’ve seen such arguments:

“If I had 10 million, I would definitely go all-in on Bitcoin. But I only have 100,000, so I can only go all-in on altcoins.”

People like this, even if given 10 million, would still go all-in on altcoins—it’s not about the amount of capital, but about cognition. Conversely, someone with only 50,000 might still buy Bitcoin if they should—wealth tiers are stratified, and so are levels of understanding.

The Industry’s “Nannies” Are Ruthlessly Exploited

The ultimate reality is: Those who contribute the most to the industry in terms of funding often receive the least respect. It’s even harder for retail investors to turn their fortunes around.

The industry is rapidly developing and constantly pushing technological boundaries. But behind these achievements lie ecological disorder, solidified hierarchies, and the struggles of newcomers.

Perhaps from this perspective, the cautious attitude of regulators toward this field is not entirely unreasonable.

The industry has made progress, but it also exposes problems. It’s easy to criticize during good times, but sooner or later, someone has to say these words.