A leading exchange recently announced a comprehensive listing evaluation system, covering three main categories: Alpha testing platform, contract trading, and spot trading.



Projects aiming to list on this platform need to pass these criteria — how well the product is developed, whether there are real application scenarios, if the token economic model is sound, the reliability of user growth data, clarity of business models and revenue streams. These are the key points of review.

It is especially important to note that the exchange explicitly emphasizes one point: project teams must submit applications directly through official channels and cannot delegate any third-party intermediaries to handle the process. This is to prevent information asymmetry and fraud risks. For projects planning to list, this set of standards is actually very useful for self-checking. By thoroughly reviewing these indicators in advance, the chances of passing will be significantly higher.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 5
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
GasFeeCryervip
· 12-20 05:13
Finally, an exchange dares to openly publish the standards. Now, those projects that rely on intermediaries to take shortcuts will have to behave themselves.
View OriginalReply0
ImpermanentTherapistvip
· 12-19 12:54
Haha, finally an exchange dares to speak openly. Not using intermediaries earns a full score from me. It's the same old familiar indicators, but honestly, are there any projects that can truly implement all of these solidly? Is the token economic model sound? You're joking. Preventing intermediary fraud? The problem is that the project team itself is the one deceiving. This system looks strict on the surface, but in reality, it still depends on the funding background and market enthusiasm.
View OriginalReply0
GasFeeVictimvip
· 12-17 06:15
Is this the same standard again? It looks like the exchanges are finally taking things seriously. Apply directly without intermediaries? About time, so we don't get taken for a ride again. Token models, user data, business closed-loop—easy to talk about, hard to do, friends. Is this really genuine, or are we just paying an IQ tax again? Wait, is there a real application scenario? This one probably kills half the projects, haha. I fully support submitting this directly to the official; too many intermediaries just add unnecessary complexity.
View OriginalReply0
MiningDisasterSurvivorvip
· 12-17 06:14
It's the same old spiel. Projects back in 2018 also hyped themselves this way. And what was the result? A token economy model that's just a joke, ending up as nothing but a Ponzi scheme.
View OriginalReply0
0xLostKeyvip
· 12-17 06:10
Alright, finally an exchange dares to take it seriously and call out those three-no projects. I'm most annoyed by those trash projects that use intermediaries to list tokens. Now, submitting directly through the official channels is the right way, and it should be done thoroughly. With token models and business paths, how many can truly pass the review? Basically, it's about who has genuine products and real data; I can't be bothered with those air coins. When intermediaries are gone, the ecosystem can thrive. This standard seems reliable, and it's definitely better than the chaotic mess before.
View OriginalReply0
  • Pin
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)