Base founder Jesse recently launched a barrage of criticism on Twitter, directly targeting a certain CEX that charges a listing fee of 2-9% of the token supply and calling on the industry to go to war. Although he didn't mention any names, anyone with a discerning eye could see that this was a slam against a certain An, whom OKX's Xu Mingxing often misses:

In my opinion, the listing fee is just a cover. As a quality screening mechanism, the listing fee is logically tenable - CEX provides traffic and exit channels, and market makers provide liquidity support. From a business perspective, charging a listing fee is natural.

What Jesse is really worried about is not this 9%, but the mysterious Eastern power that has built a complete set of "setting the stage" + "exit mechanism" combination punches.

A platform has been built in the Alpha Observation Area, and some small projects may be promoted as long as they are popular. Allowing users to earn Alpha points to replace the role of market makers actually allows retail investors to bear part of the market-making risk, but a certain proportion of Airdrop is given as an incentive. In addition, after the contract is launched, the project party can also hedge and exit by short selling.

So, the optimal strategy is to go to BN Alpha, pull up the price, and then open Perps to short sell?

This mechanism seems to benefit a large number of small projects and rekindle new possibilities for ICOs, but in fact it creates an incentive trap that prioritizes short-term monetization over long-term development.

To some extent, BN’s monopoly is not just about attention and liquidity, but about changing the rules of the game for the entire industry—replacing “long-term construction” with “quick exit.”

This is the real core of Jesse's anxiety.

Because Coinbase/Base’s coin listing route is very clear, on-chain priority → project cold launch on-chain (Base DEX, community tools) → establish real users/holders → then distribute on CEX.

Jesse repeatedly emphasized "permissionless onchain listings" and "build aligned holders from Day 1". The core purpose is to let project parties take root in the chain for long-term construction from the beginning, rather than using CEX as a "quick exit channel."

Base and Coinbase's on-chain + off-chain project screening and innovation incentive path was very effective, allowing them to enjoy attention and traffic dividends for almost an entire cycle.

However, BN's "family bucket" gameplay with exchanges as the entrance is equivalent to tacitly acknowledging that the era of heavy chain ecology is over.

For Base and Coibase, the narrative of innovation on a permissionless chain has completely lost its appeal! If you can exit directly on BN Alpha in a month, why bother slowly building a community ecosystem on Base?

To reiterate, this is the real reason why Jesse criticized BN.

According to Jesse's logic, if this continues, won't the path to value discovery for on-chain innovation be completely replaced by CEX mass production? And will all the on-chain infrastructure that Coinbase/Base has painstakingly built be a boon for others?

So, do you understand?

This is not a moral judgment about whether to charge a listing fee, but a life-and-death duel between the ecological philosophies of two crypto exchanges in the East and the West.