Altcoin Boy

Three days after I passed on $GOLDY, I started noticing something kind of unexpected.

My name — AndiLurker — started popping up in other groups.

AltRoots, AltLounge… even a few discussion threads I usually just read without saying much.

I wasn't the loudest person in the room.

But people started picking up on how I broke down projects.

And that's what changed things.

That morning, I had just finished washing my face when I saw a Telegram notification.

Message from Draize.

"There's a local project looking to list on a major DEX next month.

They're looking for some micro-influencers in the community to help with reviews and educational content.

You interested?"

I froze for a second.

This was the first time anyone ever reached out to me like that.

An actual offer — not just a reply in a chat thread.

I never saw myself as a "content creator," let alone an influencer, but this felt like a sign.

Someone out there was paying attention.

I thought for a few seconds, then replied:

"Can I ask what the project's called?"

"The token's called $CTI. Stands for CivicTech Initiative.

It's a blockchain project focused on digitizing citizen data — a collab between NGOs and the private sector.

Website's up, team's public, and the proposal's clear.

They'll offer small compensation if you're open to talking about it in AltRoots."

I opened the CTI website.

The design was professional. The roadmap was clear.

Their whitepaper described an ID-based verification system, where the token would be used to access public services.

I also looked up the founders.

They were pretty active on LinkedIn. Real people. No anonymous profiles, please.

Everything looked perfect.

Too perfect.

But I just couldn't shake that nagging feeling.

I couldn't explain it. There's no evidence. Just a hunch.

That night, I messaged CryptoGhost.

"Hey, I was contacted about this $CTI project. It looks legal, clean, and solid.

But for some reason, it just doesn't feel right.

At first, it seems like a legit project, but I'm not fully convinced.

Am I just being too paranoid?"

Two minutes later, he replied.

"You're not wrong to feel that way.

Just be careful with projects that look too clean.

Sometimes it's not about the tech or the structure — it's about who they're targeting.

Check out their primary market."

I started digging deeper into the data.

It turns out that CTI is going after users in villages in Indonesia, using an educational story and incentives for digitalization.

The goal is to get the general public involved, with the promise of small incentives to join the data verification program.

"So this is a social project, but it's locked with crypto?" I said, looking at the screen.

It's not a rugpull model. It's not a Ponzi scheme. But there's a nagging feeling creeping in.

I opened the whitepaper section on tokenomics. It's pretty clear, right? 25% of the tokens are allocated for the early team and advisors.

The distribution is set up with a one-year vesting period, but it's still a pretty significant deal.

If the price goes up, they can make a lot of money.

What if the price drops?

The villagers who don't know about these things are the ones who suffer.

I wrote a short note in my diary that night:

"I know this isn't a scam. But is it fair?"

"Do they actually want to help with digitalization, or are they just taking advantage of the public's ignorance to make a new market?"

The next day, I shot Draize a message.

"I've read the $CTI material. This project is pretty cool, I have to say. I'm not sure if it's ethical, though.

I can help analyze, but I'm not sure about being the spokesperson for a project that I'm not fully on board with yet."

He replied casually.

"Sure, that makes sense. Take your time. But, you know, think about it, Di...

If you don't help with education, the people who come in will just be people who want to cheerlead."

Sometimes we need to take on a role, exactly to prevent something worse.

His words make sense. But it feels like poison wrapped in logic.

I started to realize that this wasn't about right or wrong. It's all about that gray area.

That morning, I opened AltLounge with mixed feelings. There are 56 new messages, most of which have charts and analyses of small tokens, while some others are long debates about the narratives of socially labeled crypto projects. This topic feels very close to what I've been thinking.

I type slowly, then send the message.

AndiLurker: I'm currently taking a look at a project called CivicTech Initiative, also known as $CTI. It looks legal and clean, with a target program for digitization in rural areas. I'm just worried that it's not really empowering people, it's just making money off their ignorance. "But I'm worried about something. Is this really empowering, or are they just taking advantage of people's ignorance to make money?"

The message hung in the air for a few minutes. Then a response appeared.

Raka_ETH: Good call bringing this up. I've also read its whitepaper. "The structure is too sleek for a beginner project."

"VoidByte: I'm not a fan of projects that build ecosystems for groups who don't know much about crypto." That's not inclusion; it's manipulation with a cool facade.

I feel a little better. But not everyone sees it that way.

One name that's been around is HighRiskHighFlyer.

HighRiskHighFlyer: Hey man, you're thinking about this too much. Crypto is a risky but rewarding investment. If they offer education and rewards, that's great. We shouldn't judge them from a position of moral elitism. We shouldn't judge them from a position of moral elitism.

I read the comment a few times. There's some truth to it. But there's also a bit of danger.

I replied.

AndiLurker: I agree that everyone has the right to take risks. But we can't just hand over the responsibility of education to whitepapers and rewards. If we know the audience isn't ready, we've got options: we can stay silent, participate, or protect ourselves.

A little later, I got a DM. This time it's from one of the AltRoots members who often reads my analyses, her name is YunitaCrypto.

"Andi, I live in a village. I'm an elementary school teacher. Last week, someone approached us about a partnership using a token system. I'm a bit puzzled. But my friends were all over it and signed up right away, saying they could get incentives later if they invited others."

I didn't say anything.

"If it's the $CTI project, we should probably be careful. I don't want to see Ms. Yunita become another victim of the so-called "education" model that's all about making money."

I asked,

"Hey, just a heads-up, the token can lose its value."

He answered quickly.

"Not everyone gets it, bro. They think this is like a shopping voucher."

I closed my eyes.

This isn't about analysis anymore. This is about reality.

This is about people who've never heard of Metamask or used CoinMarketCap, but then suddenly find themselves targeted in smooth and respectful project infiltrations.

I opened CryptoGhost's DM that night.

"Hey man, I turned down the offer to help with the promotion of $CTI. But I want to write a complete analysis about the dilemma of this project." I'm not trying to attack anyone, but I'm just trying to be helpful in case a similar project comes up later.

He replied briefly.

"That's the right step." Sometimes the gray area isn't meant to be left behind. But to be enlightened.

I opened my laptop and started writing in Notion. I called the doc "Anatomy of the Gray Project: Between Legality and Ethics."

I spent two hours getting the framework ready, gathering data, and getting examples and analogies ready. I used data on digital literacy in Indonesia, village demographic data, and similar case studies from other countries. I'm not trying to show off my knowledge. But to make sure my writing isn't just guesswork.

At the end, I wrote a closing sentence that felt very personal:

"We can't save everyone. But we can't be part of a system that silences the voice of the heart."

When I pressed the "Post" button on AltLounge, my hand was a bit shaky.

But this time... I'm not afraid. I know I'm standing on the side I can bear.

That's all she wrote.

I just posted the analysis ten minutes ago, but it had an immediate impact.

The replies are coming in one by one. Some of them were just praising, while others were a bit sarcastic.

CryptoLiterati: This article is very important. A lot of projects seem innocent but are actually exploitative.

"ZeroGas: Respect. But did you know that writing like this can actually get you attacked? In the crypto world, they don't like it when people criticize them from within.

"AnonTraderX: You act so holy. If you can make a profit, then by all means, make a profit. Morality is for those who are already rich.

I went through them one by one without getting too excited.

In the middle of all the notifications, I got an email in the account I use for the community.

From: [email protected]

Subject: Following Up on Your Approach to CTI

I opened it. The email is written in a polite, diplomatic way, but it comes across as a bit too calm for the situation.

We appreciate your feedback. We're confident, though, that our approach has been reviewed for ethics and legality. We'd love to chat with you and our management to see if we can understand each other's perspectives.

I didn't reply right away.

Two days later, though, I got another email. This time, the content is different.

This is still from CTI, but it's got a different person's name on it. Their head of communications.

We get that you're a big deal in the beginner community. If you're open to changing up the perspective of the writing, we're ready to chat about a suitable compensation for your help in creating a more balanced narrative.

Compensation.

That's the keyword.

I closed the email. I'm staring at the screen, but I'm not thinking about anything in particular.

Then I opened Telegram.

I type in AltLounge:

AndiLurker: Some of you might know, but I just got an email from CTI.

They offered a discussion. Even 'compensation' to soften my writing.

I'm not looking for sympathy here. I just want to show you that the gray area isn't just for the project. It's also up to us, the analysts and observers, to make sure it's used the right way.

I paused for a second. Then he added:

"I'm not against business. I'm not against profit. But I'm not okay with the silent treatment when the weak are being put in harm's way."

I'm not going to delete my writing. If there are consequences, I'll deal with them.

The chat went quiet for a few minutes.

Then, out of the blue, the account that usually stays quiet chimed in with a comment. CoinMidwife.

"You've just graduated and become a true compass bearer. Keep your direction, Andi."

That night, I was restless. But I'm not afraid. It's more of a conscious feeling, like I've truly entered a deeper world. Dirtier. It's more dangerous.

I also know that I'm not alone, though.

The next day, in the AltRoots group, a message popped up from RizkyCrypto, who had joined $GOLDY before.

Hey Andi, I've had a chance to read your writing. I used to think you were too rigid. But now I get it. Thanks for not selling the compass, man.

I type a short answer.

"If we let go of our principles for the sake of profit, we'll just end up lost."

That day, I came home from the restaurant with a headache but feeling good.

Not because everyone agreed with me. But because I didn't betray myself.

I know, there are still a lot of gray areas out there.

There are still a lot of offers, pressures, opportunities, and traps.

But now I know one thing:

I won't always be able to take the path of least resistance. But I can always choose the path I can be responsible for.

I climbed up to the roof of the rented house that night. Staring at the dark sky.

Jakarta is still pretty noisy. But inside, I'm starting to feel more at ease.