OpenClaw Imposes Strict No-Crypto Rule on Discord

TheNewsCryptoPublicado a 2026-02-23Actualizado a 2026-02-23

Resumen

OpenClaw has implemented a strict no-cryptocurrency policy on its Discord server, banning any mentions of Bitcoin or other digital assets. This decision follows a high-profile scam involving a fraudulent Solana-based token, $CLAWD, which was promoted using abandoned social media handles during OpenClaw's rebrand. The token reached a $16 million market cap before crashing over 90% after creator Peter Steinberger denied any involvement. Although a user was temporarily banned for referencing Bitcoin block height in a technical discussion, the zero-tolerance policy remains. OpenClaw aims to prevent brand misuse and protect users from scams, prioritizing security over open discussion of blockchain topics.

OpenClaw has introduced a strict no-crypto policy across its Discord channels following a high-profile token scam linked to its recent rebrand. Peter Steinberger, the creator of OpenClaw, has confirmed that any mention of Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies will lead to a ban from the server.

The policy came into the spotlight after a user was banned for mentioning the block height of Bitcoin as a timing reference in a technical conversation. The user posted about the incident on a public forum, and Steinberger was forced to clarify the server policy.

Blanket Ban Covers All Crypto Mentions

Steinberger has justified the harsh policy by saying that all users agree to abide by the server rules when they register. The policy applies to all forms of cryptocurrency references, whether in technical conversations or otherwise.

The banned user has explained that they made the reference to Bitcoin block height only for the sake of benchmarking. Steinberger has since agreed to unban the user and asked them to send their username to be let back in.

The policy still stands despite the user being unbanned. Steinberger has said that OpenClaw will enforce a zero-tolerance policy on any cryptocurrency-related conversation to avoid confusion and exploitation.

$CLAWD Scam Sparks Crackdown

The security measure follows a scam involving a Solana-based token named $CLAWD. The incident occurred during OpenClaw’s rebranding process after Steinberger received a trademark notice that required a name change.

Scammers exploited the transition period. They seized abandoned social media handles before the project claimed new ones. The attackers used those accounts to promote the $CLAWD token, suggesting it represented an official launch of OpenClaw.

The token quickly rose to a market capitalization of around $16 million. This was due to the assumption of legitimacy by the traders. However, when Steinberger denied involvement in the project, the token crashed by over 90%.

Steinberger was accused by early buyers of being behind a pump-and-dump scam. However, he denied the allegations and stated that he would never create a cryptocurrency.

You can check the trends in crypto scam reporting on Chainalysis, and the guidelines for the Discord community can be found on the official Discord policy page.

Security Risks Extend Beyond Tokens

Later, security experts found that there were hundreds of vulnerable OpenClaw instances available online. They also found dozens of malicious plugins, many of which were intended for crypto traders.

The $CLAWD scandal brought the crypto-related communities under greater scrutiny. OpenClaw has since decided to remove all crypto-related discussions to ensure there is no risk of brand misuse.

Steinberger’s position also indicates the increasing conflict between open-source projects and crypto trading. Although some communities are open to token economies, OpenClaw has decided to distance itself.

The policy may be frustrating for users who participate in blockchain-related technical discussions. However, the OpenClaw team feels that it is more important to be clear than flexible.

By ensuring that all cryptocurrency discussions are banned, the project hopes to protect its brand and prevent misuse in the future. With the constant emergence of crypto-related scams on social media platforms, communities are increasingly turning to hard-line moderation policies.

OpenClaw’s policy also indicates that it is taking a defensive position. The project prioritizes brand protection and user safety over open communication about blockchain technology. Whether this policy will stick in the long run will depend on the reaction of the community and the reduction of security threats.

Highlighted Crypto News:

SBI Holdings Launches Tokenized Bonds with XRP Rewards to Investors

TagsBitcoinChainalysisCrypto ScamDiscordSolana

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the new policy that OpenClaw has implemented on its Discord server?

AOpenClaw has implemented a strict no-crypto policy, banning any mention of Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies on its Discord channels.

QWhy did OpenClaw decide to enforce this strict no-cryptocurrency rule?

AThe policy was enacted following a high-profile scam involving a Solana-based token named $CLAWD, which fraudulently used the OpenClaw brand, and to prevent future brand misuse and exploitation.

QWhat incident brought the new policy into the spotlight after a user was banned?

AThe policy gained attention when a user was banned for mentioning the Bitcoin block height as a timing reference in a technical discussion, which they claimed was for benchmarking purposes.

QWhat was the result of the $CLAWD token scam after Steinberger denied involvement?

AAfter Peter Steinberger denied any involvement with the $CLAWD token, its value crashed by over 90% from its peak market capitalization of around $16 million.

QBeyond token scams, what other security risks were discovered related to OpenClaw?

ASecurity experts found hundreds of vulnerable OpenClaw instances online and dozens of malicious plugins, many of which were targeted at crypto traders.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Why Not Short Even When Bearish? Munger Did the Math on a 'Losing Trade'

Why Not Short Even When Bearish? Charlie Munger's Calculated "Loss-Making Account" Many traders, drawn to speculative tools like futures contracts, often face repeated failures. As the article notes, unless one is a genius, such instruments should be avoided for long-term profit-seeking. Similarly, the practice of short selling is viewed with caution. The author firmly states a policy of not shorting, even when bearish, preferring to simply wait. The core reason? Successful short selling requires exceptionally difficult conditions to profit. Legendary investors Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger have themselves reflected on painful short-selling experiences. Munger highlights two critical flaws in the mathematical logic of shorting: 1. Asymmetrical Risk/Reward: A long position has a maximum loss of 100% but unlimited upside. A short position caps profit at 100% (if a stock falls to zero) but carries theoretically unlimited loss potential. 2. The "Promoter" Problem: Fraudulent or struggling companies can prolong their decline. As Munger said, "You can run out of money before the promoter runs out of ideas," meaning short sellers may be forced to cover positions at a loss before the company's true fate unfolds. The article cites Stanley Druckenmiller, a famed hedge fund manager. He once shorted 12 companies that all eventually went bankrupt. However, intense market rallies forced him to cover his positions within three weeks, resulting in massive losses—$200 million of his capital plus an additional $600 million. He concluded he likely never made money shorting in his career. His experience perfectly illustrates Munger's points: facing unlimited losses and being wiped out before being proven right. The conclusion is clear: for most investors, complex instruments like short selling and derivatives are not viable paths to stable, long-term gains. Self-reflection is advised before repeatedly wasting time and capital on such speculative strategies.

marsbitHace 18 min(s)

Why Not Short Even When Bearish? Munger Did the Math on a 'Losing Trade'

marsbitHace 18 min(s)

For Hedging, Buy Gold and Oil; For Explosive Growth, Buy AI; Bitcoin, the 'Outdated' Asset, Enters a Bear Market

Bitcoin’s price has recently fallen sharply, hitting a two-month low near $66,000, with Ethereum also dropping to a three-month low. While surface explanations point to ETF outflows, geopolitical tensions, and corporate selling, a deeper issue is emerging: Bitcoin is losing a crucial asset competition. For years, Bitcoin thrived in a low-rate environment where investors sought alternatives amid inflation fears and dissatisfaction with traditional options. Now, the market landscape has shifted, leaving Bitcoin stuck in an "awkward middle ground," facing challenges on three fronts: 1. **As an inflation hedge, gold is winning.** Investors worried about persistent inflation are turning to tangible assets like gold, energy stocks, and commodity producers, which offer more direct pricing power and physical backing. 2. **For growth exposure, AI is winning.** Those seeking high growth now favor AI-related companies with actual revenues and profits, an area where Bitcoin's lack of cash flow puts it at a disadvantage. 3. **Within crypto, infrastructure and stablecoins are winning.** Even investors wanting crypto exposure have alternatives like exchanges, stablecoin issuers, and tokenization firms, whose performance is directly tied to real-world adoption and offers clearer operational leverage. The recent market reaction to inflation warnings highlights this shift. Instead of boosting Bitcoin as "digital gold," such news now drives flows toward traditional inflation-sensitive assets. Therefore, recent events like ETF outflows and corporate selling are seen not as causes, but as symptoms of this new reality. Capital has more compelling options, and investors are becoming more selective. The emerging bear case for Bitcoin is no longer about it being a fraud or failed technology, but rather that **scarcity alone is no longer enough**. It is no longer seen as the best hedge, the best growth asset, or the only crypto play.

marsbitHace 34 min(s)

For Hedging, Buy Gold and Oil; For Explosive Growth, Buy AI; Bitcoin, the 'Outdated' Asset, Enters a Bear Market

marsbitHace 34 min(s)

SaaS Battle Royale: The Survivors Who Win All Share One Common Trait

**Summary** The AI revolution has triggered a "SaaS apocalypse," forcing a brutal market shakeout. The key dividing line is the pricing model. Companies like Snowflake and Datadog, which charge based on consumption (e.g., data processed or compute used), are thriving. AI workloads actively *generate* more demand for their services, fueling growth. Datadog's accelerating revenue is a prime example. Microsoft and Palantir, as platform/ecosystem players, also benefit by acting as essential channels for AI deployment. In contrast, traditional SaaS firms built on per-seat or per-task licensing (e.g., Intuit, Adobe) face direct pressure, as AI threatens to automate the very human tasks their software supports. Companies like Salesforce, a per-seat giant, are caught in the middle. While showing strong AI monetization (e.g., its Agentforce platform) and experimenting with consumption-based "Flex Credits," its stock remains under pressure, illustrating that the market rewards *completed* transitions, not just the intent. The recent Microsoft Build conference underscored key trends: AI is evolving from an assistant to an autonomous "agent," and platform providers like Microsoft are consolidating their control. The market's recovery is highly selective, focused on identifying which companies are "fed by AI" versus "eaten by AI." Future focus will be on the diffusion of this recovery to transforming companies and the real-world adoption data of AI agents like Microsoft Copilot.

marsbitHace 51 min(s)

SaaS Battle Royale: The Survivors Who Win All Share One Common Trait

marsbitHace 51 min(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片