The post that I casually roast about yesterday was still a little popular 🔥 One thing, I think Binance's intention to vote for delisting this time is good, but I didn't consider human nature clearly. I can adjust it next time. Firstly, this voting pool is a project on Binance that has been marked with an "observation tag". What kind of projects were previously marked with this tag? It's basically dead, the team is in a mess and not working, and the trading volume is too small. Apart from market makers randomly brushing points, they won't receive any trading fees. The purpose of Binance is to warn the holders of these shells that if you don't be more proactive, I will delist you, similar to St. This is a very serious warning, but in the past, it has nothing to do with the behavior (cutting leeks) that has caused widespread concern and roast in the community. For example, there have been too many cases of secretly issuing new shares after changing their names, and the Portal that has been freely launched since then is still a one page website. Even the ghost chains with daily single digit daily activity after brushing data and listing on Enron have not been included. More was put in because it lost market attention and capital value. This has created a situation where most retail investors, especially newcomers, are indifferent to these projects. Many people have not even heard of the names of these projects, nor have they been hurt, and they feel completely indifferent when investing. But GPS is the only new coin that has been put in the past year, and also the only one that has been put in due to price reasons. Perhaps it was due to the sharp drop in listing prices on that day, or perhaps it was to set an example and prevent new coins from being too reckless in market value management. So this time it's about competing on the same stage with a bunch of completely different conditions. Although it's garbage, I don't know anything else. It's meaningless to throw it, so I'll just throw it out and vent my anger for the garbage I know. Anyway, the garbage I want to throw the most is not on the list I won't say much about GPS, so as not to be attacked again and become soft mouthed. I just want to make a suggestion: For the vast majority of projects in the observation area, it is better to remove those with fewer votes instead of those with more votes. Otherwise, projects that do not work will benefit more. It's just a bunch of lying flat, you have to let them go vote and work to motivate them. The more people who work, the more they know, and the more likely they are to be voted down. Is the logic of this product reversed? Conducting a sustained elimination campaign to make these garbage people bleed and buy tickets, and campaigning and organizing activities is the right way. 2. If you want everyone to truly vent their anger, encourage the project team not to lie flat and cut leeks. Expand the voting scope to all currencies and see which ones have the greatest public outrage. Of course, it is highly likely that Eth will make it to the list, as voting is an emotion, but ultimately the right to take it down lies with Binance. In the end, not being able to take it down is secondary, mainly for the sake of satisfaction, but also as a reminder for projects that have caused great public anger. If you don't maintain the market value well, don't pull the market. Be careful that one day Binance will truly comply with the people's will and eliminate harm for the people. This is the vote that everyone really wants to cast. What does it have to do with me if a bunch of antiques are cast? @Heyibintance @ cz-binance and the big shots from Binance's product department should consider it. Anyway, I think the logic behind the delisting vote needs improvement, which is a slight mistake.