The Art of Speculation: When Coin Launches Become a Mind-Reading Game Centered on Leaders' Social Dynamics

比推Pubblicato 2026-01-08Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-01-08

Introduzione

The article "The Art of Reading Between the Lines: When Coin Listings Become a Game of Guessing Leaders' Social Cues" critiques the culture of speculation and sycophancy in the cryptocurrency space, particularly around Binance’s listing process. It draws a parallel to a Shandong dining custom where the fish head is pointed toward the guest of honor as a sign of respect—a tacit social rule that requires intuition rather than explicit instruction. The piece centers on a recent event where He Yi, Binance’s co-founder, posted a cryptic New Year’s tweet saying “我踏马来了” (roughly: “Here the f*ck I come”). Shortly after, a community-created meme token with the same name was listed on Binance Alpha, despite He Yi’s earlier statements against favoritism and “insider coins.” The author argues that this reflects a deeper cultural issue: the shift from merit-based innovation to a system where success depends on interpreting the subtle hints of influential figures. Unlike traditional industries where technical skill or product quality drive progress, the crypto industry often prioritizes access to information, relationships, and the ability to please key decision-makers. The piece suggests that this “Shandong mindset”—where insiders learn to “read the room” rather than challenge or create—undermines transparency and rewards those who excel at flattery rather than genuine contribution. While He Yi may not have directly endorsed the token, the very fact that her social media activity can t...

Author: Kuli, Shenchao TechFlow

Original Title: Where the Fish Head Faces He Yi: Crypto Has Its Shandong-Style Politics Too


There's a rule at Shandong banquets: when the fish is served, the head must face the seat of honor.

Whoever it faces is the main guest and must drink first. This isn't written down anywhere, but everyone in Shandong knows it. No one teaches you; you just learn it.

Recently, someone drew a picture called "Crypto Shandong-Style Politics." A group of people sit around a table eating fish, with He Yi in the seat of honor, flanked by KOLs, the listing team, and social media editors.

Caption: For a Binance listing, the fish head must face He Yi.

On January 1st, He Yi posted a New Year's tweet. Riding a white horse by the seaside, caption in four characters:

我踏马来了 (Wǒ tà mǎ lái le - I've f*cking arrived).

A fine New Year's greeting. "Tà mǎ" (踏马), the Year of the Horse, with a bit of playful homophonic wordplay.

Today, Binance Alpha listed a new token called "我踏马来了" (I've F*cking Arrived). It was community-made, with no direct connection to He Yi.

But look at this chain: First Sister tweets, the community creates a token, Alpha lists it.

No one needs to give any orders in the middle.

Last year, Binance was hounded by accusations of "BFF coins," alleging shady listing practices and利益输送 (interest conveyance/corruption). He Yi responded several times, saying they were reflecting, adjusting, and even created Alpha as a screening pool.

In December, she also tweeted saying, don't try to find angles in our official tweets about various Memes; we won't pay attention to this kind of thing anymore.

28 days later, her New Year's tweet became a new token on Alpha.

What was the problem with BFF coins? It was about backdoor deals, favoritism,利益输送 (interest conveyance/corruption).

These require evidence, a paper trail, a specific "BFF."

But "I've F*cking Arrived" doesn't need any of that.

No backdoor, no favoritism, no利益输送. First Sister posted a picture, and the people below just started moving on their own.

This perhaps touches on the essence of Shandong-style politics: the leader doesn't need to speak; you have to figure it out yourself.

Someone in the community commented that Alpha is now just a tool for currying favor, its purpose is to make First Sister happy.

Crude wording, but it describes a certain atmosphere.

When a platform's direction starts revolving around someone's social media activity, when "which coin to list" becomes "guess what she likes," rules cease to matter.

What matters is揣摩 (speculation/reading intentions).

Some put it more harshly: If you want to know if an industry has a future, ask one question—In this industry, do people who are good at flattery succeed more easily than people who are good at doing the work?

If the answer is "yes," then this industry is on the decline.

In crypto, this trick really works. And the most successful ones, everyone knows which direction the flattery should be aimed.

The core resources in the AI circle are technology and products; you have to deliver. Jensen Huang won't allocate you GPUs just because you call him daddy every day.

The core resources in the crypto circle are listing power, traffic, and who knows the news first. These things aren't in the code; they're in people's hands.

Things in people's hands must be obtained through human methods.

The more Shandong-style politics prevails, the more it relies on connections and information asymmetry, not innovation and technology.

He Yi might not even know about this. A small MEME worth a few million market cap isn't enough to bother the Co-CEO.

But that's precisely the problem.

She doesn't need to know. The fish head will turn by itself.

This is really much more efficient than BFF coins.

BFF coins at least required a BFF. Shandong-style politics only requires an atmosphere.

And those who see through this set of rules and implement them thoroughly are, in a way, also talented.

After all, in this society, people laugh at the poor, not the prostitute. (笑贫不笑娼 - A saying criticizing societal values that scorn poverty but overlook the means of acquiring wealth).


Twitter:https://twitter.com/BitpushNewsCN

BitPush TG Discussion Group:https://t.me/BitPushCommunity

BitPush TG Channel: https://t.me/bitpush

Original link:https://www.bitpush.news/articles/7601064

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the core argument of the article 'The Art of Speculation: When Coin Listings Become a Mind-Reading Game Around a Leader's Social Media'?

AThe article argues that in the crypto space, especially around Binance, the process of token listings has shifted from being based on innovation and technology to a culture of揣摩 (speculation/guessing) where community members and projects try to interpret the social media posts of leaders like He Yi to gain favor, rather than relying on formal rules or merit.

QWhat is 'Shandong Study' (山东学) as described in the article, and how does it relate to Binance's token listing process?

A'Shandong Study' is a metaphor derived from a Shandong dining custom where the fish head is pointed towards the guest of honor. In the context of Binance, it symbolizes a culture where participants automatically align their actions (like creating and listing tokens) to please or anticipate the preferences of leader He Yi, without any explicit instruction, mimicking the unspoken rule of the dining tradition.

QHow does the article contrast the 'Shandong Study' phenomenon with the previous '闺蜜币' (close-friend coin) controversy at Binance?

AThe '闺蜜币' controversy involved allegations of explicit favoritism, backdoor deals, and利益输送 (benefit transfer) through personal connections. In contrast, the 'Shandong Study' phenomenon requires no direct orders or concrete relationships; it operates through an implicit atmosphere where community members spontaneously act to please the leader based on social media cues, making it more efficient and less traceable than the 'close-friend coin' issue.

QAccording to the article, what does the success of the meme token '我踏马来了' (I'm Coming on Horseback) demonstrate about the current state of the crypto industry?

AThe success of '我踏马来了'—a token created and listed on Binance Alpha simply because it was inspired by He Yi's tweet—demonstrates that in the crypto industry, success can be driven by揣摩 (speculating on) and catering to the preferences of influential leaders rather than technological innovation or product merit, indicating a reliance on人际关系 (relationships) and information asymmetry.

QWhat critical question does the article suggest asking to determine if an industry has a future, and what is the implied answer for the crypto space based on the examples given?

AThe article suggests asking: 'In this industry, do people who are good at flattery succeed more easily than those who are good at doing actual work?' The implied answer for the crypto space is 'yes,' as the examples show that tokens gaining traction through揣摩 (speculation) and alignment with leaders' social media are successful, suggesting the industry may be declining if this culture persists.

Letture associate

Agent Race Ends, Super Workbench Takes Over

The era of fragmented AI agents is ending. Over the past month, China's tech giants—Tencent, Alibaba, and ByteDance—have simultaneously shifted strategy: instead of launching new, standalone AI agents, they are consolidating their various agent projects into unified "super workbenches." Tencent integrated its QClaw teams into WorkBuddy, a strategic product hailed as a potential third flagship after QQ and WeChat. Alibaba is merging its QoderWork, Wukong, and MuleRun agents into a new "Qianwen Office" platform under DingTalk's leadership. ByteDance rebranded its TRAE SOLO coding agent to TRAE Work, signaling a broader focus on workflow collaboration. This convergence marks a pivotal industry consensus. The initial exploration phase, where companies rapidly built numerous overlapping agents for different scenarios, proved costly and inefficient. With open-source tools eroding technical barriers, competition has shifted from agent creation to resource consolidation and cost control. Historically, platform wars are won not by creating more products, but by simplifying them—as seen with browsers unifying web access and super-apps consolidating services. Now, the "super workbench" aims to become the unified AI entry point for work. This reflects a deeper market realization: the primary audience for AI is no longer just programmers (a market in the tens of millions) but all knowledge workers (a market of billions). The real opportunity lies in augmenting everyday tasks—managing emails, documents, data, and meetings—across the entire workday. The core battleground is becoming control over the primary AI entry point that employees use daily. Tencent's WorkBuddy leverages WeChat and Tencent Docs; Alibaba's Qianwen Office taps into DingTalk's organizational data; ByteDance's TRAE Work integrates with Feishu's workflows. Whoever owns this "super workbench" gains strategic control over orchestrating enterprise data and APIs. This shift is redefining enterprise software. Traditional SaaS applications, valued for their user interfaces, will recede into the background. Their core functionalities will be exposed as standardized "Skills" or APIs for the super workbench's agents to invoke. Software value will shift from selling user seats to charging based on API calls and outcomes delivered. The evolution of agents is moving through clear stages: first as novel standalone products, then as consolidated primary work entry points, and finally as pervasive, invisible capabilities embedded into the digital fabric. The recent moves by major tech firms signal the transition from the first stage into the second, accelerating toward the third. In the end, the most successful agent technology may become invisible—like electricity or the HTTP protocol—a fundamental, unnamed infrastructure powering work itself.

marsbit17 min fa

Agent Race Ends, Super Workbench Takes Over

marsbit17 min fa

Michael Saylor: 110 Reasons to Oppose BIP-110

Michael Saylor presents 110 arguments against Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) 110, a soft fork aimed at restricting certain non-monetary data storage uses (like inscriptions) on the Bitcoin blockchain. He acknowledges the proponents' valid concerns—such as node costs, fee pressure, and preserving Bitcoin's monetary focus—but fundamentally disagrees with the proposed solution. Saylor argues that BIP 110 represents a dangerous precedent of using consensus rules to enforce value judgments on transaction validity, moving away from Bitcoin's core principles of neutrality and permissionless innovation. His key objections are organized into eleven categories: 1) It violates neutrality and hard consensus by banning currently valid transactions. 2) It fails to meet the high burden of proof required for a consensus change, lacking concrete data on the alleged crisis. 3) Its seven bundled technical restrictions are overly broad, targeting generic script functionalities and blocking future upgrade paths. 4) It sacrifices compatibility and future optionality by closing off designed upgrade hooks. 5) Its temporary rules add significant complexity (grandfathering, expiry states) without sufficient justification. 6) The economic and security impacts, particularly on miner revenue and fee markets, are uncertain and unmodeled. 7) Superior, market-based tools (fee markets, relay/mining policies) already exist to manage blockchain load. 8) It stifles innovation by creating a chilling effect for developers. 9) Its modified activation mechanism (55% threshold, forced signaling) is aggressive and risks network splits. 10) The precedent it sets—using consensus to suppress disliked but legal uses—is more dangerous than the problem it aims to solve. 11) A better path exists: improving measurements, refining resource-based policies, and allowing market forces to work. Saylor concludes that Bitcoin's strength lies in its neutral rules, open markets, and hard consensus. Changing these foundational elements to target specific use cases is an unnecessary and risky "iatrogenic" intervention. He advocates for guarding Bitcoin's neutrality rather than acting as its redeemer.

marsbit32 min fa

Michael Saylor: 110 Reasons to Oppose BIP-110

marsbit32 min fa

Trading

Spot
活动图片