We need to talk about Movement Labs

[slapper]

This is a big scandal. It's a stress test on all we say we know about cryptocurrencies

Movement Labs handed 66M tokens (half the supply) to a shadow-labeled market maker (Rentech posing as Web3Port), built contracts that rewarded short-term price manipulation over long-term integrity, ignored internal legal dissent, and then watched it collapse in real time. Binance kicked the market maker off the scene. MOVE dumped. Retail ate the loss

This goes beyond a single shady deal. It’s about: 
- Smuggling insider deals through the use of fake decentralisation
- Foundations protecting for-profit greed like shields
- Structures for governance that are exclusive to pitch decks

Who messed up? Moreover, how common is it for projects of this type to be constructed?
Why did everything go wrong?
What should we construct to make this not normal?
Or is this merely the current economic model of Web3?

[hugeblack]

How can things not get better when there is blind trust in project owners and centralized platforms?
Many invest just for the sake of investing, or because of initial public offerings or false advertising, without conducting real or in-depth research.

[MUGNIA]

How can things not get better when there is blind trust in project owners and centralized platforms?
Many invest just for the sake of investing, or because of initial public offerings or false advertising, without conducting real or in-depth research.

fact, if people invest just because of fomo, without doing research, here if there is a loss they blame other people, try if before investing they did research the possibility of loss might only be 25%

[Faisal2202]

Who messed up? Moreover, how common is it for projects of this type to be constructed?
Why did everything go wrong?
What should we construct to make this not normal?
Or is this merely the current economic model of Web3?

I know about this project, I joined their airdrop as well, did not get anything even if I invested so much time in it, but it is what it is haha, Well, this is really a crappy move by the Move project, they should not have done it, that's why DAO projects are more important and interesting because at least we have the ability to vote for some one proposal there.

They just hand over half of the supply, which means they own half of the supply which means the project was a rug pull from the start. IMO, a project should not have more than 10 to 20% of the total supply in their possession and if they have, then that's a red flag.

[lombok]

fact, if people invest just because of fomo, without doing research, here if there is a loss they blame other people, try if before investing they did research the possibility of loss might only be 25%

Indeed it is common to find that investment decisions are made hurriedly usually when many people are discussing what they refer to as a good investment opportunity. However, these are some of the decision that if not accompanied by adequate research we may find ourselves in a worse position in future. This is always the case with losses, we are forced to find another person to criticise, even though it was all our decision. To some extent this is likely to minimise losses and enhance effectiveness in that way, more information and effort will be yielded from carrying out more extensive accurate research hence avoiding arbitrary decisions.

[hugeblack]

fact, if people invest just because of fomo, without doing research, here if there is a loss they blame other people, try if before investing they did research the possibility of loss might only be 25%

The quality of the search plays a role. Unfortunately, all the content on Twitter and some of the content on Google is misleading, so even searching may not save you from such losses.