I am writing this message not only for myself, but on behalf of many creators and participants who joined the recent campaigns with full dedication, trust, and effort. Unfortunately, there are serious issues with the campaign points calculation and leaderboard system that must be addressed immediately.
Many users have reported that their points were not calculated correctly. Some participants received fewer points than they actually earned, while others noticed that their points were not added to their total at all. This has created confusion, frustration, and disappointment among loyal community members who worked hard to contribute quality content and support the platform.
In addition, there are major concerns regarding the leaderboard accuracy. Some users appearing in regional leaderboards, such as the Chinese or Asian leaderboard, do not match the expected criteria, and there are cases where rewards appear to have been assigned incorrectly. This raises serious questions about the fairness and transparency of the reward distribution system.
We respectfully request the Binance Square Team to:
• Recalculate all campaign participant points accurately • Add any missing points to the correct users’ total scores • Review and correct the leaderboard rankings fairly • Ensure that rewards are given only to the rightful and deserving participants • Investigate and resolve any system errors or unfair allocations
Binance has built its reputation on trust, transparency, and fairness. We believe this is a technical issue, and we trust your team will investigate and resolve it properly. The community deserves a fair system where every participant receives the points and rewards they have rightfully earned.
We look forward to your prompt response and a fair resolution for all affected users.
Thank you. and please Add tomorrow points Everyone earn..
$ASTER USDT on the 1H looks like it just flipped a switch.
Clean climb from the 0.64 zone → strong impulsive push → now printing near the session high at 0.7389. Current price around 0.73 and holding strength after a +12% move. That’s not random noise — that’s momentum.
What stands out:
• Higher highs and higher lows structure • Strong bullish candles with minimal pullback • Buyers stepping in quickly on dips • Sitting just under local resistance (0.739 area)
Now this is the key moment.
If price breaks and holds above 0.739–0.745, this can extend fast because short-term sellers will get squeezed.
But if it fails here and loses 0.71, we could see a pullback toward 0.69–0.68 to cool off.
Right now? Bulls are in control. But it’s at resistance — not early entry territory.
This is breakout-or-retrace zone.
Strong trend. Strong momentum. Now we watch for confirmation — not emotion.
Looking at this $UNI USDT (1H) chart… that candle tells a story.
We had a clean sweep from around 3.21 straight up to 4.59 — a vertical move. That’s not organic trend growth. That’s a liquidity grab + aggressive momentum spike.
And what happened next?
Heavy rejection. Multiple red candles. Lower highs forming.
Now price is sitting around 3.35, almost back near the origin of the impulse.
Here’s what stands out:
• The 4.59 wick = clear blow-off top • Sellers stepped in hard after the spike • Structure right now = short-term bearish / cooling phase • 3.21 is key support (previous low before the pump)
If 3.21 breaks, this move could fully unwind. If buyers defend above 3.30 and reclaim 3.45–3.50, momentum could attempt another push.
Right now it’s not “explosion mode.” It’s “decision zone.”
This is where patience matters more than excitement.
If you’re trading it: – Don’t chase wicks – Wait for structure – Watch volume on any breakout
The big move already happened. Now the market decides who controls the next one.
Price is hovering around 0.1122 – 0.1109 — a tight zone where momentum feels like it’s building. You can almost sense the pressure. When a chart compresses like this, it usually doesn’t stay quiet for long.
Upside levels to watch: 🎯 0.1139 🎯 0.1151 🎯 0.1170
Risk level: 🛑 0.1103
This isn’t about blind hype. It’s about structure. When volatility dries up and price holds support, the next move often comes sharp and fast. If buyers step in with volume, this could turn into a quick breakout attempt.
But remember — fast moves work both ways. Manage risk. Respect your stop. Stay disciplined.
$CRCL just flushed to 55.91 and snapped back hard. Buyers defended the lows twice, building a short-term higher low on the 1H. Momentum is curling up, but 59.60–60.30 is heavy resistance. Setup: Entry 57.80–58.20 SL: 55.70 Targets: 59.60 / 60.30 / 62.00 Bulls need a clean break above 59.60 to flip structure. Come and trade on $CRCL #USTechFundFlows #USRetailSalesMissForecast #USNFPBlowout #CZAMAonBinanceSquare #BitcoinGoogleSearchesSurge
$PLTR printed a sharp 3M recovery after dipping near 134.97. Higher lows forming, buyers stepping in on pullbacks. Resistance sits at 135.90 and 140.12. Setup: Entry 134.90–135.20 SL: 132.80 Targets: 135.90 / 137.50 / 140.00 Momentum building — breakout watch. Come and trade on $PLTR
$OG OG bounced hard from 0.646, reclaiming 0.67. Higher lows forming. Entry: 0.665–0.675. SL: 0.648. Targets: 0.70 / 0.74 / 0.78. Break 0.70 and momentum accelerates. Come and trade on $OG
$BERA BERA surged +52%, reclaiming 0.80 after 0.76 sweep. Buyers in control. Entry: 0.79–0.81. SL: 0.75. Targets: 0.86 / 0.92 / 1.00. Watch volatility spikes. Come and trade on $BERA
$DYM DYM carved a base at 0.0466, printing higher lows toward 0.048. Early reversal signs. Entry: 0.047–0.048. SL: 0.046. Targets: 0.050 / 0.053 / 0.058. Break 0.051 unlocks momentum. Come and trade on $DYM
$ETH ETH just snapped back from 1,956 support, printing higher lows on the 3m and squeezing toward 1,975 resistance. Buyers are stepping in aggressively after the sweep, momentum shifting bullish. Entry: 1,965–1,972. SL: 1,952. Targets: 1,985 / 2,000 / 2,015. A clean break above 1,977 opens expansion. Come and trade on $ETH
$BTC USDT BTC defended 66,860 and built a sharp V-reversal. Structure flipped with higher highs pressing 67,300. Bulls control short-term momentum. Entry: 67,100–67,250. SL: 66,800. Targets: 67,600 / 68,000 / 68,800. Lose 66,860 and sellers reload. Come and trade on $BTC
Most blockchains fight for attention. Plasma feels like it’s building for responsibility.
The more I look at it, the less it feels like a “next big thing” narrative and the more it feels like infrastructure being shaped by real pressure. Stablecoins are already being used like digital cash in many parts of the world. That means certainty matters. Finality matters. Reliability matters.
Plasma’s sub-second finality isn’t about speed bragging rights it’s about knowing a transaction is done, not “probably done.” Gasless USDT transfers and stablecoin-first gas aren’t flashy features they just remove small pieces of friction that real users actually feel.
Even the EVM compatibility makes more sense when I think about institutions. They don’t want to experiment with completely new tooling. They want predictability. Familiar standards. Clear audit paths.
And honestly, what stands out most isn’t the big features. It’s the quiet improvements node updates, better observability, validator adjustments, stability fixes. The kind of work that doesn’t trend but keeps systems alive under scrutiny.
Plasma doesn’t feel loud. It feels deliberate.
Not trying to dominate headlines — just trying to handle real money without breaking when it’s questioned.
And in this space, that kind of maturity feels rare.
Plasma: Rethinking Stablecoin Infrastructure Through Real-World Pressure
I’ll be honest at first, I looked at Plasma the same way I look at most new blockchains. I scanned for speed, consensus type, EVM compatibility, staking model… the usual checklist. In my head it was just another Layer 1 trying to compete in a crowded space.
But the more I thought about it, the more I realized I was asking the wrong questions.
Plasma isn’t trying to be everything. It’s built around stablecoin settlement. And that sounds simple, but it changes the entire conversation.
Stablecoins aren’t a theory anymore. In many countries, they’re already used like digital dollars. People use them to save, to send money home, to protect against inflation. Institutions use them for payments, treasury management, and cross-border transfers. That’s real pressure. Real accountability. Real expectations.
When I read about sub-second finality through PlasmaBFT, I used to think, “Okay, it’s fast.” Now I think, “That’s accounting clarity.” If you’re moving serious value, you don’t want uncertainty. You don’t want to explain to a finance team why something might reorganize. Finality isn’t about speed for bragging rights — it’s about certainty.
The EVM compatibility through Reth also felt standard at first. But now it feels practical. If you’re asking companies to build on you, you can’t also ask them to relearn everything from scratch. Familiar tooling, familiar audits, familiar smart contract patterns that reduces risk. It may not be flashy, but it lowers friction.
The stablecoin-first gas model and gasless USDT transfers seemed like small UX tweaks. But when I picture someone in a high-adoption market trying to send money, I see why it matters. If stablecoins are the main asset, why force users to hold another token just for gas? Removing that extra step makes the experience cleaner. It’s a small design decision that reflects real user behavior.
Privacy is another area where my thinking shifted. I used to see it in extremes — either full anonymity or full transparency. But the real world doesn’t work like that. Retail users may need discretion. Institutions need audit trails. Regulators require visibility under certain conditions. Absolute privacy can clash with compliance. Absolute transparency can scare users. Contextual privacy — where visibility depends on role and need — feels more realistic. It’s not ideological. It’s practical.
What really changed my perspective, though, was noticing the quiet updates. Node improvements. Better logging. More reliable uptime. Observability tools. Validator adjustments. None of that trends online. But those are the things that matter when auditors start asking questions. When payments depend on stability. When downtime isn’t an option. Infrastructure grows up quietly.
When I try to understand the token and staking model, I strip away the noise. Validators stake to secure the network. They participate in consensus. There are rewards for reliability and penalties for bad behavior. It’s not revolutionary tokenomics. It’s structured security. And honestly, that’s fine. For settlement infrastructure, predictability is more important than creativity.
There are trade-offs too. EVM compatibility means inheriting some legacy constraints. Focusing on stablecoins means not optimizing for everything else. Migration from older systems won’t be instant. But I’m starting to see those as necessary compromises. Real financial systems evolve step by step. They don’t flip a switch overnight.
Looking ahead, I don’t imagine dramatic headlines. I imagine steady progress. More integrations. Better tooling. Stronger validator distribution. Refinements to Bitcoin anchoring for neutrality and censorship resistance. Quiet growth in markets where stablecoins already play a major role.lnstitutions testing carefully before expanding.
What’s changed for me isn’t excitement — it’s clarity.
Plasma doesn’t feel like it’s trying to win a narrative battle. It feels like it’s trying to survive scrutiny. And that’s different. Designing for audits, compliance, uptime guarantees, and real operational pressure is a different mindset than designing for hype cycles.
I’m not overly impressed. I’m not skeptical either.
I’m just starting to see the logic.
And sometimes, when something starts to make sense in a grounded, practical way that’s more convincing than any bold promise could ever be.