Thank you to everyone who read, liked and shared the article.
Every bit of support helps spread awareness and may prevent others from becoming victims.
I know this kind of work is neither entertaining nor easy to consume.
It also generates virtually 0 income, especially compared with the time and research behind it.
That is why I am increasingly questioning whether it still makes sense to keep investing so much effort into these investigations.
This is not complaining.
I’ve looked at it objectively and accepted the reality of it, so spare me the angry replies.
It is a sober assessment of the situation;
While others accept paid promotions, push questionable projects or trade their credibility for badges and access, I have tried to remain independent and hoped that voluntary support would eventually make the work sustainable.
Honestly, I no longer expect that to happen. This space increasingly rewards hype, extraction and proximity to the right circles, while independent work is treated as disposable.
Over roughly 2 years, voluntary support amounted to around $400 from 5 donors.
A week in which I published 2 of the most liked and most shared posts in the history of this account generated an X payout of $80. The week before 105$.
Even at only 20 hours of research (It's much more btw), writing, verification and community work, answering DMs, that would equal $4 per hour.
At 40 hours, it would be $2.
The economic signal is difficult to misunderstand.
A paid promotion can generate more income in 1 afternoon than months of independent investigation.
A badge deal, token allocation or private advisory arrangement can be worth more than years of public interest work.
The people who refuse these offers are therefore placed at a structural disadvantage against those willing to monetise their credibility.
Once someone has accumulated enough money, influence or access, long term thinking often becomes less important.
The ecosystem that created their wealth becomes something to extract from rather than protect. Reputation becomes a disposable asset, followers become liquidity and the next promotion matters more than the damage left behind.
That creates a predictable selection problem.
The most visible voices are not necessarily the most informed, independent or useful.
They are often simply the ones with the strongest financial incentive to keep selling. Meanwhile, the people doing slow, unglamorous work are expected to provide it indefinitely for attention, gratitude and the vague possibility that support might eventually arrive.
That model is not sustainable.
A community that refuses to fund independent work will eventually be left with content funded by advertisers, insiders, exchanges, badged accounts, token teams and people whose interests are hidden behind every recommendation.