CZ's implied confrontation with dingaling, netizens online lining up for PK

Written by: Deep Tide TechFlow

Welcome to the first day after the May Day holiday, where the crypto market is still full of gossip and hot topics.

During the May Day holiday, the native token $BOOP of the new token launch platform Boop.fun clearly stood out as one of the best performers, with a market cap once surpassing 500 million USD. With the listing of $BOOP on Binance Alpha yesterday, the community's attention towards this token has become even more intense.

However, amidst the excitement of new coin launches, CZ's "subtext post" quickly sparked discussions in the community about Boop.fun founder dingaling.

On May 5, CZ hinted in a reply on X that a former employee was fired for "mouse trading" (insider trading) and claimed to have been a "Binance CXO," a position that Binance doesn't even have.

Although CZ emphasized not to take it personally, the description in the original post of his reply, "A founder recently launched a platform project on Solana claiming to disrupt the Meme gameplay," is actually very straightforward.

If you have been watching the market trends recently, you can easily associate this with Boop.fun and dingaling.

The most interesting part is that on dingaling's profile (with 250,000 followers), aside from indicating that he is the founder of Pancakeswap, he indeed has a former Binance "CRO" title. This, combined with CZ's statement that Binance has never had a certain CXO title, makes the implication quite tangible.

When there is a connection between the facts, please do not take things personally in speech, as it resembles a form of camouflage and armor; although the parties have not directly confronted each other, the insinuations have already caused an uproar in the community.

If you search for dingaling on cryptocurrency social media sentiment websites, you will find that discussions about him on foreign networks have rapidly increased in a short period of time, and many old brothers are passionately debating this matter.

In these discussions, aside from the defense of how much Boop positions lead to the butt deciding the head, more informative is the discussion about the past of dingaling and the future development of boop.

Vague CRO, real NFT diamond hands

Who exactly is Dingaling?

The title CRO is somewhat ambiguous; some speculate it stands for Chief Risk Officer, while others say it refers to Chief Revenue Officer, and there are also those who believe it means Chief Research Officer.

Dingaling himself seems to have no response to what the abbreviation CRO refers to. With the publication of CZ's post, some netizens jokingly referred to this CRO as Chief Rat Officer (, implying that it refers to someone who was expelled for being involved in a rat trading scheme.

But jokes aside, amidst the ambiguity of job titles, some traces of the past can still be seen.

The crypto blogger NFT Ethics revealed that in the early years, dingaling's Twitter was named @DinghuaXiao, which seems to correspond with his full name. Although most of his associations with Binance have been removed from the internet, some community users' screenshots show that you could directly chat with him on Telegram at that time to help you deal with issues related to using Binance.

This is more like a role for responding to customer complaints or handling customer relations.

Beneath the surface of direct customer interactions, NFT Ethics points out that the lesser-known connection between dingaling and Binance is that he was one of the heads of Binance's offshore entity (Bermuda) and has retained screenshots of the company's website (which may now be taken down) that show CZ and Ding Hua Xiao listed together.

In addition, more information shows that Ding Hua Xiao is also one of the members of West Realm Shires Inc, a joint venture between Binance and FTX, which is a key entity for FTX that controls FTX's operations in the United States (i.e., FTX-US).

The document also shows the shareholding ratios of SBF, CZ, and his co-investors, with Ding holding 5.33%; although the percentage is not high, it still reflects his relationship with the core team of FTX and CZ.

Most of the content revealed by NFT Ethics was released in 2022, and the existence and validity of the content can no longer be verified. It is impossible to accurately determine Ding's position at Binance, and we can only get a glimpse of the situation from this summarized information.

However, one thing is certain: Dingaling is definitely not just an ordinary employee.

Although the name is vague, Dingaling's behavior in the crypto market is traceable, which is why the community is discussing him enthusiastically:

An OG player in the NFT circle, a well-known diamond hand.

He is considered one of the most successful "NFT investors," having held 113 Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC) and over 70 Azuki NFTs in his early years, accumulating 1.4 million Ape airdrops, with a market value of over ten million dollars.

In addition, he is an early investor in CryptoKitties and one of the largest investors in NBA Top Shots.

The community refers to him as "NFT OG" and "diamond hands" because he rarely engages in short-term "pump-and-dump" but is accustomed to the strategy of sweeping the floors, buying a large number of floor-priced NFTs and holding them for the long term.

In the popular version of NFTs, players often use whether dingaling has been bought as a standard for determining whether an NFT is blue-chip quality. The floor sweeping strategy also easily raises the price of NFTs, benefiting other players holding the same NFT, thus earning widespread trust within the community.

The cautionary tale of LooksRare, can Boop succeed?

As an NFT trader, dingaling is undoubtedly successful, even considered a big shot; however, his track record in investing in products or creating products is not so impressive.

In 2022, dingaling made a high-profile entry into LooksRare as an advisor and investor. At that time, Opensea held a dominant position in the NFT space, while LooksRare aimed to disrupt this leading NFT market and secure a place in the competition.

At the same time, LooksRare launched the $LOOKS reward mechanism to incentivize users to trade, and the initial trading volume once approached OpenSea. However, the good times did not last long, as the overall market began to weaken, and phenomena such as a large amount of wash trading (( self-buying and self-selling) existed, causing the NFT market to collapse, and LooksRare was unable to succeed.

In terms of price, $LOOKS had an all-time high of around 7 dollars, while the current price is about 0.01, which can be said to have already gone to zero, belonging to the series of tears of the era.

The rhythm of history is so similar, in this cycle Pump.fun has been in the spotlight, and a batch of challengers and innovators has emerged in the market, trying to pull it down from its throne; Boop.fun is one of them.

Once again, a similar launch mechanism, coupled with a slightly different reward mechanism, does this replicate the script of Looksrare challenging Opensea?

The data panel on Dune regarding Boop.fun shows that within the first 5 days of the platform's launch, the daily token launches have exhibited a significant downward trend; as of the day before this report was published, the daily token launches on Boop have dropped from an initial 10,000 to between 1,000 and 2,000, while the number of active addresses has also shown a daily decreasing trend.

Whether Boop.fun is feasible in a market environment with insufficient liquidity and severe PVP remains to be seen.

Community fermentation, an ant shaking a tree

The future of Boop.fun is indeed uncertain, but at this moment, someone has spoken out for dingaling, directing their criticism towards CZ.

On Ethos Network, a small user with only 215 followers, @chadstrdaumus0, initiated a "reduction" proposal, attempting to punish CZ for the FUD regarding Boop through decentralized governance.

The mechanism here is that Ethos Network is a decentralized social platform aimed at building a reputation system for the crypto economy. Users generate reputation points by staking Ethereum and can review others (positively or negatively) or initiate a "Slash" proposal to punish bad behavior, such as spreading FUD or fraud. Slashing requires community voting to pass, and if successful, the slashed individual's staked assets may be forfeited and their reputation points damaged.

@chadstrdaumus0's proposal directly targets CZ, arguing that his "in-depth post" makes false accusations against Boop and dingaling, damaging the project's prospects.

This is very Web3; everyone can challenge others' statements according to their own logic and judgment, even if the other party is CZ.

However, there are currently not many people participating in the discussion and comments, and some have pointed out that such accusations need to have clear evidence to be valid. The accuser needs to provide very clear and detailed evidence, such as whether this CRO position actually exists, whether dingaling has ever held the CRO position, and other direct information; rather than just making vague accusations against CZ with scant details as is the case now.

However, for the proposer, what matters may not be the truth, but the position.

Corporate Brand VS Crypto OG Reputation

Looking back, CZ's void in the confrontation just lacks direct naming, while dingaling has not yet dropped his previous Binance CRO title. What are the motivations of both parties?

CZ's "in-depth post" seems casual at first glance, but upon deeper reflection, it may involve a segmentation of interests.

If Dingaling claims to be "the former Binance CRO", especially after Boop goes live on Binance Alpha, facing a price collapse or any negative association events could damage Binance's credibility and lead the market to question whether there are interests being transferred and so-called insider trading.

Binance, as the largest exchange in the world, has faced controversies due to regulatory pressure (U.S. investigation in 2022), and CZ's sensitivity to the brand image is evident.

And dingaling has not changed his personal profile until now, unless he cannot see CZ's comments and related hot discussions, which may have already expressed an attitude.

Although there was no active effort to use the "CXO" title to hype up Boop, all the publicly available information, including the past of NFT OG and even this vague CRO position, can be considered a form of reputation. Silently leveraging that reputation to endorse new projects, allowing Boop to go further, is also a smart choice.

We cannot know the private grievances behind it, but we can be sure that:

There is no baseless expression; every voice in the crypto market is defending the interests they believe are worthwhile.