How the Onchain World Actually Works
A little over a year and a half ago, I tried bootstrapping a platform called Higherrrrrrrr. It was a collectibles platform on Base designed to turn trading into entertainment. The core idea was something I called “evolutionary memes”—on-chain assets where the metadata physically changed as the price shifted. We tied the evolution directly to Uniswap pools; as the price moved, the art evolved. Everything was designed from the ground up to be fair with locked liquidity. It was gamified speculation, and honestly, it worked better than I expected.
Early on, I was floored by our traction. We had real legs. But about a month in, I noticed something that didn’t add up.
We had social engagement that rivaled some of the biggest projects on base, yet their trading volume was multiple orders of magnitude higher than ours. Their prices were mooning; ours were moving normally. I’ve always believed crypto is good for two things: large-scale stablecoin transfers and upfront speculation. I have no problem with speculation, as long as everyone knows that’s what they’re doing and that the projects are marketing things not as products but as entertainment assets which we did through and through.
As I started digging into the data in December 2024, I realized the game was rigged.
The “Market Making” Illusion
What I discovered and what has since started trickling out in various lawsuits is a massive game of market manipulation.
Here’s how it works: Teams hand over a massive percentage of their token supply to “trading firms.” These firms then become the “house.” They provide the liquidity, meaning every time an average user trades, they are trading directly against a professional firm with an infinite information advantage. In some cases, they even coordinate with MEV (Miner Extractable Value) bots to effectively strip-mine the end consumer.
We didn’t do that. Our growth was organic, which meant our charts looked “normal.” But because we weren’t rigging the engine, we couldn’t compete with the “success” of projects that were.
When the Data Got Dangerous
On Christmas of 2024, I started posting raw data to X. I didn’t make accusations; I just posted the numbers we found on Dune Analytics. I wanted to show the community the reality of these shadow markets.
That’s when things got dark.
I started receiving what I’d call “backhanded blackmail.” Anonymous accounts, some years old, started dropping personal details about my life that weren’t public into random chats. Some of it was related to my past struggles with alcohol (something I’ve worked hard to overcome), but other details had no digital footprint and pointed to members of my family. It became clear that I was being followed in person.
I was terrified. Not just for my reputation, but for my safety and the safety of those around me. By March 2025, I took my name off the project. I stepped back. And because these were culture-led tokens, when the public face leaves, the culture fades, and the tokens lose value. I chose to hold what small parts I had to zero too so that I didn’t betray the community for those memes. I felt like I couldn’t explain why I was leaving though without publishing the full data, which felt like a reckless move that would put a target on my back and those I love.
Finding the Middle Ground
I’ve done a lot of inner work since then. The fear is still there, but it’s quieter now. I’ve tried writing about it several times but this moment in time feels more right.
It hasn’t sat right with me that the current regulatory environment actually seems to protect the manipulators while punishing the builders. We’ve reached this weird polarized state: either “crypto is all evil” or “deregulate everything.”
The truth is in the middle.
I believe speculative art and entertainment assets should exist. There is clear product-market fit for the “absurdity” of things like ConstitutionDAO or the entertainment assets we were allowing people to create. People love being part of a viral moment. But that shouldn’t require a market structure that enables teams to hide behind thousands of addresses to fake traction and manipulate prices.
I’m writing this today because I care. I was outspoken behind closed doors with ecosystem leaders back then, and it saddened me how few (none) were willing to stand up for the average person getting liquidated by shadow market makers.
I tried to be that person, and I got threatened for it. But I’m still here, and I still believe we can do this better. We need transparency, not just for the sake of the law, but for the sake of the technology actually finding its footing. Part of posting this is just giving myself the opportunity not to be afraid anymore and part is to while a lot less people are listening say that I’m willing to be a small voice advocating for the right thing in these markets.
It was sort of hard for me to find the courage to say this because of how scary it got, but I find it important to be part of a solution rather than through my fear being part of the problem by omission. I moved on over a year ago and have a normal job and life. I still care a lot about the users in these markets and still would like crypto to find its place in the world even if after knowing all of this I no longer feel excited to be a part.