Gate Square “Creator Certification Incentive Program” — Recruiting Outstanding Creators!
Join now, share quality content, and compete for over $10,000 in monthly rewards.
How to Apply:
1️⃣ Open the App → Tap [Square] at the bottom → Click your [avatar] in the top right.
2️⃣ Tap [Get Certified], submit your application, and wait for approval.
Apply Now: https://www.gate.com/questionnaire/7159
Token rewards, exclusive Gate merch, and traffic exposure await you!
Details: https://www.gate.com/announcements/article/47889
It's kind of funny how the same talking points keep resurfacing whenever you question altcoin development practices. The unstated premise? Bitcoin devs get a free pass because they're somehow the moral custodians of the space—and good luck arguing otherwise.
Think about the logic here. Bitcoin developers are treated as infallible by definition, so their choices (or lack thereof) are automatically justified. Inaction becomes a virtue. Silence becomes wisdom. It's circular reasoning dressed up as principle.
Meanwhile, altcoin teams face scrutiny on steroids. Different rulebook entirely. The double standard isn't even hidden anymore—it's baked into how the community evaluates decision-making across projects.
The rhetorical move is slick though. Anytime you push back, the response is predetermined: "Well, Bitcoin devs operate differently because they're Bitcoin." Which tells you nothing about whether that difference actually matters or whether it's just narrative convenience.
Worth asking: who decided Bitcoin developers get to set the moral compass for the entire ecosystem? And more importantly, does that framework actually hold up under scrutiny, or is it just tribal loyalty masquerading as principle?