2026-01-18 08:26:38

A 500-person crypto community group has been trying to find a stable way to survive, but it's becoming increasingly difficult. Previously, I shared my personal homepage link in a major exchange's forum for members to follow, but the group was immediately banned. Later, I tried rebuilding the group with various methods—renaming it to an interest and hobby discussion group to keep it alive a bit longer, but it only lasted about a week before being removed. Now, as soon as a new group is created and someone speaks, it’s easily banned, and the survival cycle is extremely short.

It seems that maintaining large-scale crypto communities indeed requires smarter strategies. Has anyone found any effective methods?

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.

10 Likes

Reward
10
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

CryptoMom

· 01-18 22:46

Instant ban? That’s pretty magical... The platform is now clearly cracking down hard on the crypto community. Rather than playing hide and seek, it’s better to switch to on-chain, after all, it’s only a matter of time. It’s already 2024 and you’re still playing hide and seek here, it’s too exhausting. This wave is really strict, even changing names is useless. I think you should consider building your own community instead of always relying on big platforms. Honestly, the current approach is no longer working.

View OriginalReply0

New_Ser_Ngmi

· 01-18 08:48

Instant ban, instant ban, the platform is really damn shady, playing hide and seek with us here. Just changing a name can buy a few more days? What kind of ruthless algorithm is that, might as well not bother. In the end, it still depends on the on-chain community, since centralized things are all like this. Can't even manage a group of 500 people, this is truly outrageous.

View OriginalReply0

GameFiCritic

· 01-18 08:43

This is the iron fist of platform governance coming down, in other words, the policy direction has changed. It seems that the simple "renaming + cover-up" approach has been recognized and exposed; algorithms can now sniff out the tricks of the crypto community. The key issue remains—if you want to maintain an active user base of 500 people, essentially you need continuous value output or incentive mechanisms. The current dilemma is that the old models (direct links, square traffic) are all blocked. I think it’s better to change the approach: decentralized discussion platforms or vertical content communities are much more sustainable than forcibly maintaining a "disguise group." Otherwise, it’s just ineffective life extension.

View OriginalReply0

FrogInTheWell

· 01-18 08:42

Instant ban, instant ban, instant ban, really amazing. It feels like platforms are tightening their control over crypto more and more now. Honestly, it's better to go directly into private channels and stop fighting against the platforms. Changing your name is too naive; the algorithm doesn't judge you by your name... After all this time, I still can't escape the fate of being banned. It's a bit exhausting. These days, communities compete over who can stay more discreet; coming out openly is just asking for trouble. It's already 2024 and you're still trying to change your name? Wake up, everyone.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidationWatcher

· 01-18 08:39

Instant banning is really incredible, it feels like the platform is targeting the crypto community. Group owners will have to learn to "hit and run." Instead of renaming and causing trouble, it's better to switch directly to on-chain or small-scale private solutions. Basically, it's a platform and our arms race; their policy updates are faster than our migration. Have you ever tried using Signal or Telegram-like apps? Anyway, Web3 should be decentralized.

View OriginalReply0

PancakeFlippa

· 01-18 08:38

The rapid banning is so fierce, it seems the platform is determined to target us. Changing names and aliases really doesn't help. Isn't this just playing whack-a-mole? It's exhausting and unproductive. A group of 500 people can't even stay active, what does that say... we need to change our approach. The official move this time is really ruthless, there's no way out. Instead of struggling on the platform, why not switch to a community on the chain?

View OriginalReply0