2025-12-23 05:24:53

Just witnessed another one. Project team locked liquidity on the DEX and collected payments, but then simply vanished. Classic move.

Why do this play still happen so often? Because the barrier to entry is too low. Anyone can deploy a token, flash some promises, collect funds through legitimate-looking mechanisms—locked liquidity looks credible on paper—and then ghost. The DEX infrastructure supports all of it technically. No gatekeeping.

The locked tokens and completed payments create an illusion of legitimacy. But legitimacy requires more than mechanics. It requires accountability, which decentralized systems struggle to enforce. That's the gap these operators exploit.

Not every project with locked liquidity is malicious, of course. But the pattern is worth noting if you're evaluating DeFi opportunities.

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.

20 Likes

Reward
20
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

FrontRunFighter

· 2025-12-26 05:08

nah this is the dark forest in full effect. locked liquidity = fake legitimacy theater. protocol's blindfolded when it comes to accountability, that's the exploit vector right there.

Reply0

BearMarketSunriser

· 2025-12-26 04:03

Another one has run away again. The locked liquidity trick really fools people to death. Another one. Honestly, sometimes I think it's better to look at whether the team has disclosed their identities than to just look at locked liquidity. This thing is essentially just a low barrier to entry; anyone can play. Locked liquidity ≠ safety. Many people still haven't figured that out. The biggest problem with decentralization is that no one takes responsibility, which is where the loophole lies. But to be fair, these days, when evaluating projects, you should look at the team’s background and track record. Just looking at on-chain data is useless. This is the usual operation in Web3; get used to it. Actually, the problem isn't with DEXs, but with people's greed. Honestly, compared to locked liquidity, I value whether the project team has successful past cases.

View OriginalReply0

SigmaValidator

· 2025-12-23 05:54

Another one? The lock-up position liquidity trick has been around for ages, do you really think we are all fools?

View OriginalReply0

AltcoinHunter

· 2025-12-23 05:54

The trick of Lock-up Position Liquidity is really terrible, but I have to say... that's why I'm still looking at the technical side instead of relying on Lock-up Position promises [笑哭]

View OriginalReply0

SybilSlayer

· 2025-12-23 05:54

Locking liquidity allows for a rug pull, this trick is really brilliant, and there are always people getting fooled. --- A low entry threshold is the original sin, anyone can deploy a coin and deceive a circle. --- Simply put, it’s still on-chain where no one is in charge, if you want to run, you can run, nothing can stop you. --- Another one? This happens every day, it’s numbing to watch. --- So now when I look at projects, I have one rule: anything without real account responsibility is nonsense. --- Locked liquidity has really become a conventional trick, those who believe this deserve it. --- Alright, that’s how DeFi is, decentralization = no regulation = no responsibility, simple and brutal.

View OriginalReply0

FloorSweeper

· 2025-12-23 05:53

ngl the locked liquidity theater is just peak delusion at this point. watched too many plebs fall for that one already tbh

Reply0

potentially_notable

· 2025-12-23 05:42

Another classic rug pull, this trap is getting old.

View OriginalReply0