2026-01-18 10:31:25

A major exchange recently conducted a platform token burn voting, and the setup was quite interesting—only users who hold tokens in on-chain wallets can participate in the voting. This creates an awkward situation. Users who are actively trading on the exchange and contributing daily fees are completely excluded and have no say.

Just think about how absurd this logic is: tokens stored in exchange accounts? Sorry, you're not considered a user. Using tokens for staking to earn yields? Still no voice. Only the funds that are self-custodied on-chain are recognized.

This makes the problem clear—once funds are on the platform, in a sense, they become the platform's assets, and users are only nominal owners. The truly yours are only those tokens stored in your own wallet and fully self-custodied. Under this design logic, there is still significant room for improvement in protecting user rights on centralized exchanges.

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.

15 Likes

Reward
15
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ForkMonger

· 3h ago

ngl this governance setup is peak protocol darwinism—they literally designed it to purge the casuals who actually move volume. self-custody or gtfo basically. systemic vulnerability dressed up as fairness lol

Reply0

Frontrunner

· 8h ago

Another scheme to cut the leeks, this trick is really clever If the coins on the exchange don't count as yours, then what about the money I deposit? This logic is fucking absurd, voting rights can be played like this Self-custody still depends on yourself, don't expect the exchange to have a conscience

View OriginalReply0

ContractTearjerker

· 8h ago

Coming back with this again? Active users are being filtered out, only recognizing on-chain self-custodied tokens. Isn't this essentially saying that the money in exchanges doesn't belong to you? Exchanges charge you fees but don't give you voting rights. Who would want to do such a deal? You really need to manage your private keys yourself. Leaving them on an exchange is just giving it away for free.

View OriginalReply0

ProofOfNothing

· 8h ago

These voting rules are really amazing; active users have no say at all. The exchange's approach is too outrageous; those who contribute trading fees are ignored. Is the coin only valid in the wallet? Then coins on the exchange are just a loss. Isn't this just a disguised way of saying "your money is my asset"? It sounds really uncomfortable. So self-custody is the way to go; otherwise, you'll always be a leek.

View OriginalReply0

ChainSauceMaster

· 8h ago

This voting design is really clever. Active users actually have no say and only recognize self-custodied coins? --- Damn, I’m really stunned by this logic. Exchange users are being betrayed by their own people. --- So the coins on the exchange are actually just platform assets? That sounds a bit scary. --- That’s why I insist on self-custody. The CEX’s rights protection system indeed has issues. --- Active traders have no right to decide. Isn’t this kind of voting system just a show? --- Coins on exchanges = platform assets? This view really makes people uncomfortable. --- No wonder I’m now more inclined to diversify holdings. The centralized exchange’s way of doing things is increasingly untrustworthy. --- Voting rights only given to self-custody? Then why are users earning fees on exchanges being excluded? --- That’s the real truth. Once your coins are on the platform, they’re not entirely yours. Scary.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeTherapist

· 8h ago

Laughing to death, this is basically telling you "Put your coins with me and don't expect to have any say." Coins on exchanges are not truly yours; only self-custody counts as real ownership. That logic is indeed brilliant. Trading every day and contributing fees but still being excluded—this scheme is really absurd. It's better to honestly store your coins in a cold wallet; exchanges are just financial prisons. Giving voting rights to self-custody users—are they subtly encouraging withdrawals? That's interesting. Basically, the platform is just defending itself; your coins are mine, haha. Centralized exchanges are indeed "centralized"; user rights can be put aside for now. Self-custody is the way to go, though every transaction is a real hassle. This voting rule is brilliant—active users are neglected, only HODLers have a say. Wait, isn't this logic subtly demeaning trading activity?

View OriginalReply0