Who's responsible for the dead coins?

[bluebit25]

Between developers and Investors, who's responsible for the AltCoins that goes dump or likely to be ghost coins in total disappearance even from the market cap?
Rumours goes around that it's the developers intentions while done days it's the Investors impacts that determines how much active the and stable the AltCoins could stay in the market cap.

So, who's responsible when the Coins dies?

the related people

It includes holders, creators, MM,...

But in this space there are so many cases that there would be no serious concern about that subject if they were not the top altcoins (FTX, LUNA,...)

But anyway, maybe from the beginning you should be realistic about the risks, don't expect the benefits to always be on your side. So as always, let's encourage everyone to learn about Bitcoin so that they don't lose money the issue of responsibility behind the failure.

[andyou1234]

I think the person responsible for the failure of a project and the death of a token is the project developer, but what happens now is that if the project stops and fails, the project developer disappears and is not responsible for what he has done, maybe just that they deliberately created this project just to take the participants' money.

[batang_bitcoin]

Between developers and Investors, who's responsible for the AltCoins that goes dump or likely to be ghost coins in total disappearance even from the market cap?

Everyone.

Rumours goes around that it's the developers intentions while done days it's the Investors impacts that determines how much active the and stable the AltCoins could stay in the market cap.

Both are involved on it but you know what's impactful? the move of the developers and that's because the investors are only relying to the decision of the developers. And with every first touch, it is the developers.

So, who's responsible when the Coins dies?

Devs obviously.

[yazher]

The scammers, just create lots of shitcoins to confuse and steal the money of investors by making counterfeit every trending coin such as Memecoins and NFT as well, they are the main reasons why altcoins investments are not recommended for newbie investors because they are putting a lot of hype in their projects and in the middle of nowhere they dumped it and leave their investors waiting for the price to rise again which will never happen and it turns their coins into dead coins with no development, updates or whatsoever.

[Belarge]

I think the person responsible for the failure of a project and the death of a token is the project developer, but what happens now is that if the project stops and fails, the project developer disappears and is not responsible for what he has done, maybe just that they deliberately created this project just to take the participants' money.

We have our targets and I'm never going in for these fast rising projects, instead I'm focusing on important races. Projects failed when the team didn't put in enough work and most of these projects that failed are mainly cause by the incompetent tasks carried out by the developers. We know how porous it is nowadays to bring in top coin, which is mainly a memecoin. Pumping and dumping are two different thing, one brings a faces of joy while the other does brings sad faces.

[oktana]

Both can be said to be responsible but I’ll rather pawn it off at the developers than the investors because if you develop something that is outstanding and you are constantly maintaining it, you will definitely have investors who believe in what you’re doing. Isn’t it how Bitcoin grew? If the investors leave, it’s very likely that they are losing faith.

[johnsaributua]

In my opinion, the essence of responsibility is the coin owner (developer) because the creator can only be told (team), when he gets a reward then leaves. As long as the developer does his job well for the community, and is not concerned with enriching himself, it will survive more especially if the funding rise can be managed by continuing to be added, I see that from time to time there are dead coins that fall and are not injected with liquidity so that they are drained and the marketcap of a coin is getting worse. I agree that it is not entirely the developer's fault, they sell their coins and there is no coercion, as for the fomo that eats away at investors, it is entirely the logic and decision of the buyer's speculation.

However, I think there are still many who buy from the beginning, it is a risk when you get a profit that is beyond analysis, as well as the opposite when a dump occurs on a coin. For me, it is suitable for hit and run even if it only saves a few minutes, because for stable coins it is better to choose coins that are old and have good daily marketcap volume.

[GreatArkansas]

Between developers and Investors, who's responsible for the AltCoins that goes dump or likely to be ghost coins in total disappearance even from the market cap?
Rumours goes around that it's the developers intentions while done days it's the Investors impacts that determines how much active the and stable the AltCoins could stay in the market cap.

So, who's responsible when the Coins dies?

Think also some dead altcoins that are still pumping even they are very long time dead, this means some are just manipulating it and we are not sure who are they , could be whales or developers or founders just to make some money off it or some could fully exit.

[AVE5]

It's both. Imagine someone having the power to have the number of tokens that they have, increase, and maybe get it in an early stage and they can move it around. Once they are able to see the coin listed in a big exchange or it's in DEX, they wait for volume and then they just dump everything. This is with the price going down but not dying.

The main responsible for the coin dying is going to be the developers. It's up to them to continue improving the project.

With my little knowledge of understanding, I believe you because the investors are like stake shareholders while the developers are the co-owners. So considering this fact, it's the responsibilities of the developers to enhance the coins services with every required technical and maintenance factors that has to bring values to the coins.
I think the investors were basically attracted to invest in the project based of potential speculations about the project and failure to attain those values would cause investors to disembark from the coins and therein the project could slump
So in all ramifications, the developers are responsible.

[albon]

There is no specific reason for the death of tokens. If you go back years ago, you will find that Coinmarkcap contained many of the leading tokens at the top, which have completely disappeared now and been replaced by other tokens.

Perhaps the reasons for the death of a token, in my opinion, could be due to wrong decisions made by its team or developers that led to its collapse and death, as happened with Luna. It is also possible that the token team, which owns a large percentage of its supply, might dump it if the primary motive is fraud in the first place. Also, the incompatibility of the coin concept does not align well with blockchain in terms of use cases, which led to its downfall. The lack of attraction and interest of Investors or the shortage of liquidity for the coin's team to continue developing their project and paying employees’ wages and marketing campaigns to promote it or pay its listing fees could also contribute. Also, the coin may be exposed to massive protocol exploits or smart contract vulnerabilities. There are countless other reasons, but what I see is that most meme coins are susceptible to this inevitable death and transition to zero because their projects are fragile and lack strong foundations.

[Sebas.tian]

 I think, developers are the responsible for the failure or dead of the project, because if the developers do everything possible within their ability to improve the project, it will make the project to attract more investors that will continue making the project popular in the market to last long. Investors always look for where they can be favour in a particular projects, and if the project is not functioning well in the eyes of the investors, they have the right to switch to another project that is doing well but if the developers of that project can develop the project for investors to see with their physical eyes, it will be difficult for the project to die quick. That is why many coins are still bringing favour to their investors, because their developers are at work to ensure the coins causes their investors massive income to earn in the future.

[laijsica]

Between developers and Investors, who's responsible for the AltCoins that goes dump or likely to be ghost coins in total disappearance even from the market cap?
Rumours goes around that it's the developers intentions while done days it's the Investors impacts that determines how much active the and stable the AltCoins could stay in the market cap.

So, who's responsible when the Coins dies?

The developers involved in the death of the coins are definitely responsible because they may start their crypto journey with weak infrastructure and attract few buyers. Then various errors and deviations in their transactions are detected which are manifestations of their infrastructural weakness. In many cases developers may fail to provide professionalism in their work. But I strongly believe that most of the altcoins in the crypto market only come with the purpose of deceiving investors. Therefore, investment in altcoins recommends different protection requirements.

[MiF]

Between developers and Investors, who's responsible for the AltCoins that goes dump or likely to be ghost coins in total disappearance even from the market cap?
Rumours goes around that it's the developers intentions while done days it's the Investors impacts that determines how much active the and stable the AltCoins could stay in the market cap.

So, who's responsible when the Coins dies?

I think the developers is the responsible for the death of the coin, because investors only buy coin that they think has a future, or give them profit and if the developers do nothing with their coin to improve then the investors will not buy and the coin will become shit coin or dead coin at they end, but if the developers make a good use case then it is possible that many investors will come and invest and it can make a high demand of the coin and possible it will rise.

[LogitechMouse]

Between developers and Investors, who's responsible for the AltCoins that goes dump or likely to be ghost coins in total disappearance even from the market cap?
Rumours goes around that it's the developers intentions while done days it's the Investors impacts that determines how much active the and stable the AltCoins could stay in the market cap.

So, who's responsible when the Coins dies?

None.
Why none. Because at the end of the day, a dead coin will remain a dead coin.

Developers? Investors? If a project becomes a dead coin for example, who will be the one that you're finding if investors lost their money? You can't find those developers because at first place, they didn't reveal their identity. I can't remember a project that became an abandoned coin for years, and got resurrected again and there are new developers that continued that supposed dead project. Some might say the developers are the one that's responsible as to why. So what now if they are? You will find them and put them to jail if you lose your money?

If I will choose though, I think it's the developers because they didn't do everything they can for the project to become a successful once, it became a dead coin.

[decodx]

So, who's responsible when the Coins dies?

Well, definitely those developers and project heads that create them.  If a coin is crappy or too gimmicky, or even an outright scam (and yeah, those exist alright) the fault lies squarely on them! I mean they gotta ship something with real merit, right? Sure, hype and excitement can send prices ballooning for a bit, but no smoke and mirrors can prevent a coin from tanking eventually and 

now about ghost coins - more often than not shady devs make off with the money pocketed from investors.  So really, folks looking to buy cryptos should be darn careful about who they decide to fund.

[AVE5]

I think, developers are the responsible for the failure or dead of the project, because if the developers do everything possible within their ability to improve the project, it will make the project to attract more investors that will continue making the project popular in the market to last long. Investors always look for where they can be favour in a particular projects, and if the project is not functioning well in the eyes of the investors, they have the right to switch to another project that is doing well but if the developers of that project can develop the project for investors to see with their physical eyes, it will be difficult for the project to die quick. That is why many coins are still bringing favour to their investors, because their developers are at work to ensure the coins causes their investors massive income to earn in the future.

So the developers could actually have a plan B budgeted that if the current launched coin fades they would swap to other pending projects to cover their lost or I should say providing another scheme to drain investors funds or what?
Clearly and believably, developers are to be accountable because the coins potentials and technical programs were developed and installed by the developers including the maintenance and improvement factors are disclosed to the developers while investors are only individuals who steps up to invest their funds and just let it generate income for them and if the Coin is doing well they can accumulate on DCA but if it doesn't lucky ones would always cashout before those dramas of system crash as the developers inabilities to build a solid blockchain with potential coins.

[adaseb]

Coins die for many different reasons. Some just lose interest, others the developers give up, other get hacked or exploited in some way.

Then they are some which are neither of those but the coin keeps losing value anyways due to poor marketing. It’s  been like this for many cycles and will continue.

Right now every 5 minutes we got some new memecoins which pops up and ends up dying a few hours or days later due to rug pulls.

[strunberg]

Between developers and Investors, who's responsible for the AltCoins that goes dump or likely to be ghost coins in total disappearance even from the market cap?
Rumours goes around that it's the developers intentions while done days it's the Investors impacts that determines how much active the and stable the AltCoins could stay in the market cap.

So, who's responsible when the Coins dies?

I think it's the developer. Although some investors can cause a coin to die such as putting in a lot of money to pump up the price and then selling all their assets so the price will fall and the coin will die. That is market risk. But what some developers do is they sell the tokens they own in large quantities when the price has risen thousands of percent. Developers can even sell at any price because they hardly need to spend capital. I have seen people cheated on a coin several times because the developer had sold all the tokens they had and abandoned the project.

[OrangeII]

I think if anyone can be blamed for why a coin dies, then it is the fault of Dev and his team. However, they could not convince investors to continue investing in the coins they created. In addition, they may not innovate, develop or adapt, thereby placing competing projects above them. However, there must be information or something else that makes investors sell their assets and makes the coin worthless. If Dev and the team have innovation and can adapt to circumstances and make better developments, I think a project or coin will not go bankrupt.

[laijsica]

Between developers and Investors, who's responsible for the AltCoins that goes dump or likely to be ghost coins in total disappearance even from the market cap?
Rumours goes around that it's the developers intentions while done days it's the Investors impacts that determines how much active the and stable the AltCoins could stay in the market cap.

So, who's responsible when the Coins dies?

I think it's the developer. Although some investors can cause a coin to die such as putting in a lot of money to pump up the price and then selling all their assets so the price will fall and the coin will die. That is market risk. But what some developers do is they sell the tokens they own in large quantities when the price has risen thousands of percent. Developers can even sell at any price because they hardly need to spend capital. I have seen people cheated on a coin several times because the developer had sold all the tokens they had and abandoned the project.

Developers are certainly responsible for the coin's demise as well as many investors. Investors can often feel insecure about their investment capital due to the price environment and may decide to sell prematurely to protect their invested capital. Rumors in the market or any legal complications could make the coins death imminent. Every currency in the market has its opponents who can spread rumors and resort to various scams to attract investors of other currencies to attract their investment. But I think developers should work on improving its technical quality along with campaigning extensively to attract investment from their buyers through positive work.