I sincerely suggest that exchanges should implement an elimination mechanism at the end.

For example, monthly statistics should be taken to remove projects with the lowest trading volume and turnover rate, or those that have not shown any effective fluctuations for several consecutive months; no need for any observation list, just delist them directly.

Because there are now many tokens that aren't just ignored anymore, but have completely turned into "stablecoins."

If you say it drops, it hardly drops at all.

If you say it rises, the volatility for a month might not even reach 1%.

The trading volume looks somewhat intact, but it's mostly bots doing the trading.

The spot market lacks liquidity, and contract trading is even worse, with no value in short selling.

Usually, these kinds of coins end up with two outcomes:

1. The project team has already partly run away, just not announcing their death.

2. The project team slowly accumulates shares at the bottom, waiting until they've gathered enough chips, then suddenly pumps it up only to dump it again, and then the price stabilizes again, continuing to act like a stablecoin, waiting for the next round of harvesting.

Essentially, having such projects on exchanges is meaningless for users.

There is neither liquidity nor trading value, and in the end, it only provides a venue for the project team to repeatedly harvest existing users.

On the contrary, if exchanges have clear delisting pressure, the project team will behave a bit more like real people. If they don't provide liquidity, operate, engage active users, or announce progress, then they shouldn't keep occupying their spot.

Otherwise, in the end, bad coins won’t die; they will only be reduced to tools of harvesting.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。