Original title: (Solv Protocol Drama: A Breakdown of BTCFi's First Major Controversy of 2025)
Author: vivilinsv
Compiled by: Plain Language Blockchain
NuBit founder's 'scam alert' - The first major crypto event of 2025 is unfolding in the #BTCFi space! The Solv Protocol drama has attracted widespread attention in the crypto community.
Here is a detailed analysis of the incident, including what happened, how the event escalated, and its impact on #BTCFi and the entire industry.
Disclaimer: This article only represents the objective view of an observer, and the author has no vested interest with any party.
1. What happened?
Accusation: User @Clarissexx0805 accuses @SolvProtocol of failing to fulfill promised returns, claiming she staked 1800 BTC, and the team originally promised her certain returns, but she ultimately only received the minimum return. Solv responded that she did not redirect to higher-yield products as required.
Solv's response:
@SolvProtocol responded that @Clarissexx0805 chose the product with the lowest returns, and despite having the opportunity to switch to better options, she took no action. Therefore, Solv believes it did not make a mistake.
Escalation of the situation:
The situation further escalated when @nubit_org founder @trackoor issued a 'scam alert' and urged users to withdraw from Solv. He compared Solv's transparency to that of @FTX_Official and accused Solv of having 'fake TVL.' This action added fuel to the fire, and subsequently, Solv accused him of spreading FUD.
2. Public discussion
This dispute has sparked widespread reactions in the crypto community: most notably, concerns about its transparency.
Critics, such as @nina_rong, @BitHaHa, and @trackoor, question why 1800 BTC remains in @Clarissexx0805's wallet and is counted in @SolvProtocol's TVL, raising concerns about transparency.
Support for Solv:
In the crypto circle, some people have also come forward to defend Solv, claiming that these accusations are 'deliberately orchestrated conspiracies' aimed at spreading FUD and damaging the protocol's reputation.
Solv team counters that this is a conspiracy theory: Solv co-founder @myanTokenGeek suggests that this dispute may be a deliberate defamation campaign, hinting at a potentially organized attack against Solv.
@RyanChow_DeFi's statement:
In his post, Ryan defended @SolvProtocol with the following points:
Transparency: He reiterated that the team has consistently maintained open communication regarding its operations.
Protocol design: Ryan explained that 1,800 BTC is staked through a specific mechanism and calculated in the TVL based on standard DeFi operational procedures.
Sense of responsibility: He believes that users need to take responsibility for their fund allocations and proactively seize opportunities for higher returns.
3. Personal opinions
I met @RyanChow_DeFi and @myanTokenGeek in Shanghai during the pandemic in 2021 and have always been impressed by their dedication and resilience. @myanTokenGeek (Mr. Meng) left a very deep impression on me as a philosophical person, while Ryan is full of youthful energy and determination. The team's ability to continue innovating through market cycles over the years is truly admirable.
1) Responding to accusations
The current situation highlights the complexity of disputes in the DeFi space. Here are several key points worth our deep consideration:
Unclear transaction terms: The agreement details between @Clarisse and Solv are somewhat vague. Essentially, this is a 'he said, she said' situation, making it difficult to clarify the responsibilities and commitments of both parties.
Focus of the dispute: The issue of returns. Clarisse's accusation centers on unfulfilled returns. If the Solv team's explanation is accurate, that she did not choose to redirect BTC to higher-yield products, then the primary responsibility should lie with her. However, there is also a critical question: Should Solv proactively remind or assist a significant user in maximizing returns? Especially in a model that combines centralized and decentralized elements, a friendly reminder could prevent this uproar.
Solv's response: The Solv team's response was swift and organized, demonstrating strong crisis management capabilities, providing a model for the crypto industry in crisis response.
Transparency issues: @nubit_org founder @trackoor raised reasonable concerns about on-chain transparency. If the protocol could more clearly disclose its operational methods and data reporting, it would help build trust and avoid similar disputes.
Potential manipulation: Meng Yan's claim that Solv may be facing a larger conspiracy, while interesting, is unverified. As an observer, we can only speculate. For retail investors, this again underscores the importance of fairness and transparency in the ecosystem.
Wide-ranging impacts on BTCFi and transparency: Currently, BTCFi has yet to achieve widespread adoption, and growth in this space has been relatively subdued in 2024. Originally, @SolvProtocol was seen as a positive force driving development in this area for 2025, but this incident may slow that momentum.
Impact on BTCFi: Similar disputes may undermine trust in this emerging field. If mishandled, they could hinder participation from institutional and retail investors, thereby affecting the development of BTCFi.
Need for transparency: This area urgently requires clearer transparency standards. Protocols should take measures to ensure users can clearly understand the risks, returns, and mechanisms of their investments. Clearer on-chain reporting and user education will help reduce similar disputes in the future.
2) Industry lessons
This incident provides several important lessons for the industry:
Proactively communicate with high-value users.
Report TVL and other key metrics transparently.
Establish a clear dispute resolution mechanism.
3) Summary of thoughts
As an observer, I believe this incident highlights the growing pains of the crypto industry. The accusations and rebuttals reveal systemic issues but also provide opportunities for industry development. BTCFi has enormous potential, but its success hinges on building trust through fair, transparent, and user-centered practices. I hope the lessons from this dispute can promote positive changes for @SolvProtocol and the entire crypto ecosystem.
