A project initially performed well, with charts continuously trending upward, but as several developers began vying for influence and competing with their own strategies, the situation completely reversed. The price ultimately plummeted to zero, and related assets and derivative projects also collapsed. This phenomenon is frustrating—despite being a promising narrative framework, it was destroyed due to internal conflicts within the development team, and ultimately, the holders who trusted the project suffered the most. Such cases reflect the flaws in the incentive mechanisms designed for developers in certain projects, and highlight the risks that the entire project ecosystem may face when participants prioritize personal gains over ecological health.

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.
  • Reward
  • 7
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
PortfolioAlertvip
· 18h ago
Another failed project, internal team conflicts are indeed the biggest killers --- Developers fight, retail investors foot the bill, how familiar is this routine --- Basically, there's no check and balance mechanism; one person making all the decisions is the most dangerous --- Watching the chart rise and rushing to follow, only to be buried alive by internal power struggles, so sad --- The incentive mechanism is just a facade, who the heck would refuse money for the sake of ecosystem health --- A bunch of selfish people sabotaging each other, and in the end, the community bears all the consequences. Is this what web3 democracy looks like? --- I've seen too many of these. Early on, everything looks glamorous, but once profit sharing comes into play, the truth is revealed --- Team splits = project death, this has become an iron law, right? --- So, when evaluating a project, look at whether the founder can keep their team in check and whether the team culture is reliable --- Paid another tuition fee, next time take a closer look at the team composition before rushing in
View OriginalReply0
JustHereForMemesvip
· 01-06 23:02
It's the same old trick. Developers start with sweet talk and pie-in-the-sky promises, then once they have money, they begin internal fighting, and in the end, the retail investors are the ones paying the price. That's why I only watch new projects now without touching them. It's too exhausting. If the team isn't united, no matter how good the narrative is, it's all useless. It's truly incredible. Things that could have succeeded are doomed because of their own self-destructive behavior. Incentive mechanism design feels completely rotten across the entire industry. Why not clarify the distribution of power beforehand? Why wait until a collapse happens to regret it? Another project ruined by internal strife. Who's next? This is why I now prioritize team atmosphere first, then read the white paper when considering trend-following projects. Developers' personal interests > ecosystem health — this formula seems to always hold in the crypto world. The funny thing is, holders still have to pay for their scheming and infighting. Seeing news like this just annoys me; it's the same old story every day.
View OriginalReply0
FlatlineTradervip
· 01-06 23:01
Another internal conflict destroys one, a classic script Developers each doing their own thing, ultimately retail investors pay the price That's why I always look at the team governance structure first when evaluating projects. I directly pass on projects with a bunch of big shots checking and balancing each other A poor incentive mechanism leads to this outcome, there's nothing more to say Human greed, no matter how good the narrative, is useless I've said it before, the biggest fear for decentralized projects is not technology, but people It seems like this kind of thing will happen more and more...
View OriginalReply0
DancingCandlesvip
· 01-06 23:00
Another internal conflict destroys a project... Really frustrating. Developers fight each other for personal gain, retail investors end up paying the price. This pattern is seen too often. If the incentive mechanism isn't well designed, it's just a matter of a group of people acting independently and the project failing.
View OriginalReply0
AirdropCollectorvip
· 01-06 22:52
It's the same script again, developers backstabbing each other internally, and in the end, the ones who get stuck with the mess are always us retail investors. If the team isn't capable, then even the best concept is useless. That's why I only dare to play meme coins now. Anyway, they all go to zero, so at least I don't have to listen to gossip. The incentive mechanism was poorly set from the start, which is basically because no one truly wants to do things well. Watching these projects fall from their peak is the most painful part—not because the money is gone, but because that dream is gone, do you understand? So my only principle now is—if the core team isn't stable enough, I won't touch it at all. Another "potential narrative" has died because of human nature—how many times has this happened?
View OriginalReply0
rugpull_survivorvip
· 01-06 22:49
It's the old routine of internal strife again; when the development team turns against each other, the project is doomed. Discord within the team is even more fatal than technical issues, really. That's why I now only pay attention to projects with a clear governance structure. During early dyor, it's easiest to be fooled by this kind of narrative, so frustrating. Developers have their own hidden agendas, retail investors end up holding the bag—classic script. Inadequate incentive mechanisms are like laying mines; they will explode sooner or later.
View OriginalReply0
MoonWaterDropletsvip
· 01-06 22:45
Another lousy script... Internal team conflicts directly kill a project, it's truly unbelievable. --- Basically, it's because the incentive mechanism isn't well designed; developers have their own agendas and all want to be the boss. --- Holding good cards and playing them badly is truly outrageous, no wonder everyone distrusts the project team. --- Healthy ecosystem? Laughable, they probably never even thought about this issue. --- That's why I now look at whether the team is stable before considering a project. Once I see signs of disagreement, I run. --- The most pitiful are the trusting holders, suffering huge losses. --- Conflicts of interest are really a project killer, and there's no cure.
View OriginalReply0
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
English
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)