Coin and Crypto on Medium Review Guide: Everything You Need to Know (With FAQ)

Scrolling Medium for crypto tips and wondering what’s signal vs. noise? Curious if the “Coin and Crypto” page is actually helpful—or just another hype machine? Let’s sort that out fast so you don’t waste your evening.

Why crypto pages on Medium can be risky (and how that affects you)

Medium can be great for crypto education, but it also rewards content that gets clicks, claps, and shares—not necessarily the content that’s the most accurate. That creates a few problems:

• Hype overload: Eye-catching titles often outrun the facts. Research shows that sensational claims travel faster than accurate ones, which fits what we see in crypto content too. 
• Shallow posts: Many writers summarize other blogs without checking docs or on-chain data. It reads well, but leaves you with half-truths.
• Hidden incentives: Affiliate links and sponsored overviews can look like “alpha.” Warnings have been issued for years about paid promotions that look like research. 
• Timing traps: By the time a hot take hits Medium, the trade may be gone—or worse, it’s part of a pump-and-dump pattern documented in research. 

Bottom line: you want clean, sourced insights—not marketing dressed up as analysis.

What you’ll get here (quick promise)

I’ll show you exactly how to approach Coin and Crypto on Medium so you can:

• Decide in minutes if it’s worth following
• Scan posts safely and spot weak signals fast
• Separate education from promotion with a simple checklist
• Use posts for learning—not impulse trades

Why this review actually helps

I use a consistent, plain-English rubric every time I assess a crypto source:

• Transparency: Is the author clear about who they are and how they operate?
• Research quality: Are there links to docs, code, or on-chain data—not just other blogs?
• Risk warnings: Are downsides and assumptions spelled out, or conveniently ignored?
• Incentives: Are referrals, sponsors, and paid placements disclosed?

This is the same lens I use to avoid clickbait and stay focused on reliable sources.

What you’ll learn in the next few minutes

• Whether Coin and Crypto fits your goals (beginner, trader, builder, or long-term holder)
• Scan posts—and what to skip
• How to fact-check claims in under 5 minutes
• Alternatives to round out your feed if it’s not your style

“Never confuse a readable post with a reliable one.” If it doesn’t cite docs, explorers, or source material, treat it as a starting point—not a green light.

Ready to see what the Coin and Crypto page is actually about—and how Medium itself shapes what you read there?

What “Coin and Crypto” on Medium is and how it works

Coin and Crypto on Medium is a standalone Medium handle that publishes crypto content inside Medium’s built-in ecosystem. Think of it as thoughtful, long-form analysis built for decision-makers—founders, DAO stewards, protocol designers, and serious learners. Posts are longer than social threads, more accessible than academic papers, and designed to fit Medium’s reading flow (clean layout, estimated read time, tags, highlights).

Because it sits on Medium, reach is shaped by the platform’s signals—tags readers follow (like Cryptocurrency, Web3, DeFi), claps, highlights, and whether a story lands in a larger publication (for example, many crypto writers also publish under well-known Medium publications like Coinmonks). That means smart formatting and topic selection can matter as much as insight when it comes to getting surfaced.

“In a market that trades 24/7, the scarcest asset isn’t alpha—it’s your attention. Spend it on writing that respects your time.”

The basics: profile, style, and coverage

Before reading, I scan the profile for quick cues. You can do the same:

• Bio and links: Look for a clear bio, “education not advice” disclaimers, and links out to X/LinkedIn/Newsletter. Real-world handles are a positive signal.
• Tone: Most Medium crypto pages swing between educational explainers and opinionated takes. A good stream blends both: practical guides during calm markets, context and frameworks during volatile weeks.
• Coverage: Expect a mix across Bitcoin/Ethereum/L2s, DeFi, wallets, security, and sometimes NFT or airdrop angles. If the timeline is full of single-token posts with breathless titles and no risks, I downrank it fast.

When a page aims to teach, you’ll see plain-English intros, definitions up front, and step-by-step sections. When it leans opinion, expect “why this matters” and “my take” sections. Neither is wrong—the key is whether the piece tells you what to check and what could go wrong.

Content types you’ll usually see

Pages like this tend to rotate through a familiar set. Here’s what I look for—and the green flags that separate value from fluff:

• Guides & walkthroughs: Wallet setup, basic security, staking, bridging.

  
  Green flags: numbered steps, screenshots or gifs, warnings (fees, approvals, revoke steps), and links to official docs.

  
  Sample headline style: “Set up a self-custody wallet in 10 minutes (with screenshots)”

• Market commentary: Weekly or event-driven takes on price, flows, L2 fees, or catalysts.

  
  Green flags: on-chain metrics cited (e.g., DEX volume, active addresses), clear timeframes, and no calls to “ape.”

• How‑tos: “Bridge from L1 to L2,” “Add a custom network,” “Use a DEX safely.”

  
  Green flags: risks called out (fake contracts, approvals), gas tips, and revert steps if something breaks.

• Listicles: “Top wallets,” “Best airdrops to watch,” “5 analytics tools.”

  
  Green flags: upfront criteria (security, UX, fees, support), and at least one con for each item. If you see only praise, treat it as marketing until proven otherwise.

• Project spotlights: A focused look at a protocol or token.

  
  Green flags: token design explained in plain terms, team/background links, roadmap, and a balanced risks section (emissions, unlocks, governance capture).

One pattern you’ll notice on Medium: posts that teach fundamentals tend to age well and keep getting surfaced via tags and search. Trend-chasing “this could 10x” stories pop for a day and vanish. If time is tight, start with the former.

Posting cadence and consistency

Frequency matters more than people think. A steady cadence usually means a repeatable process and fewer “moonshot” pieces written for clicks.

• How to check: Scroll the profile and note the last 5–8 timestamps. Weekly or biweekly is a healthy range for thoughtful crypto writing; daily is fine if posts are short and scoped.
• What gaps can signal: Month-long silences often mean the page is seasonal (bull-only) or part-time. Spikes of posts around major pumps suggest incentive-driven writing. Neither is an auto-fail, but I lower expectations.
• Why recency matters: Research shows that visible date stamps strongly influence perceived credibility and help readers judge freshness. In crypto—where fees, contract addresses, and app flows change—stale dates are more than cosmetic; they’re a risk.

I also scan for updates. Responsible authors add a quick “Updated on [date]” note when UIs change or risks emerge. If old guides aren’t touched during major upgrades (think wallet permissions or chain reorgs), I treat them as read-only history, not instruction.

How Medium shapes the reading experience

Medium nudges what gets written and what you’ll see first. Knowing the levers helps you read smarter:

• Paywalls: Many posts are free; some are for Medium members. Authors can share “gift links” that bypass the paywall. If a tutorial is paywalled without external docs, that’s a soft red flag for utility.
• Claps: Readers can give up to 50 claps per story. Helpful as a popularity signal, not a quality guarantee. Clap spikes often follow catchy headlines and timely tags.
• Highlights & responses: You can highlight lines and see what others saved. Highlights surface the most useful bits fast—if the only highlighted lines are punchy one-liners, the piece might be light on substance. Responses can add context or call out errors; I always scan the top ones.
• Tags: Authors add up to five tags (e.g., Cryptocurrency, Web3, DeFi). Tags influence distribution, so topics with current momentum get more play. Expect more L2, airdrop, and restaking content when those tags are hot.
• Publications: Stories published under big Medium publications (like Coinmonks) often get extra reach. That boosts visibility, not accuracy—use it as a starting point, not a stamp of truth.
• Reading time: Medium famously found that ~7 minutes is a sweet spot for engagement. That’s why you’ll often see “7–10 min read” explainers—just long enough to feel substantial, short enough to finish in one sitting.

Put simply, @coinandcrypto’s visibility is a product of both content and platform mechanics. The best posts play fair with those mechanics: clean structure, clear tags, sourced claims, and honest risk notes.

All of that sets the stage—but the real question is: can you trust what you’re reading? Next, I’m going to run a quick trust check—authorship, sources, conflicts, and track record—so you can decide in seconds. Curious how it scores?

Trust check: is Coin and Crypto credible?

If you’ve ever read a crypto post that felt smart but left your gut uneasy, you’re not alone. In this space, confidence is cheap and accuracy is expensive. I care about one thing here: can you trust what you read on the Coin and Crypto Medium page enough to protect your stack or make smarter decisions, not riskier ones?

“Don’t trust, verify.” — a mantra that never goes out of style in crypto

Here’s how I run a no-nonsense credibility check in minutes, the same way I’d evaluate any Medium publication that claims to educate or analyze the market.

Transparency and authorship

Great crypto content doesn’t hide the person behind it. If a page wants your trust, it should make itself verifiable.

• Real identity signals: Look for a real name, not just a handle. Do they link to X, LinkedIn, GitHub, or a project site that matches their claims? Bonus points if they share a research methodology or an “about” post describing how they source information.
• Cross-channel consistency: Do their other profiles reference the same Medium page? Inconsistencies across bios are a red flag.
• Update trail: Credible authors show edit notes or at least a line like “Updated on [date] to reflect [change].” You can also check historic versions via the Wayback Machine.
• Red flags: No bio, no links, only a Telegram/Discord invite, and a promise of “10x” or “guaranteed yield.” If they ask you to DM for a whitelist or “special access,” close the tab.

Sources and research quality

Trust shows up in the links. Solid posts cite primary sources (docs, repos, on-chain data, filings), not a chain of other blog posts that repeat each other.

• What “good” looks like:

  • Protocol details link to official docs or EIPs, e.g., EIP-4844 and Ethereum docs.
  • Market or gas claims link to explorers or dashboards, e.g., Etherscan gas charts, DeFiLlama, or a public Dune query.
  • Regulatory or ETF mentions link to SEC EDGAR filings, not rumors.
  • Security claims cite audit reports (e.g., OpenZeppelin audits) or GitHub issues, not screenshots from Telegram.

• Surface-level tells: Hypey adjectives, price targets without a model, charts without axes, “as many analysts say” with no names. If you could remove the token’s name and the paragraph still works for any coin, it’s fluff.
• Reality check: Research found false stories spread faster than truth on social platforms because they’re more novel and emotionally charged. That’s why I weigh posts with verifiable sources over viral takes—especially on Medium where engagement can nudge visibility.

Conflicts and incentives

If a post can make money when you click, buy, or sign up, that doesn’t make it bad—but it does require balance and transparency.

• How monetization shows up:

  • Exchange patterns like binance.com/en/register?ref=XXXXXX or bybit.com/invite?ref=XXXXXX
  • Hardware wallets like ledger.com/?r=XXXX or trezor.io/?offer_id=…
  • UTM tags and trackers like ?utm_source=medium, ?aff=, ?via=, ?ref=
  • Copy that says “use my link,” “grab your bonus,” or “10% fee discount” with a special URL

• Balance indicators: Do they include downsides, regulatory uncertainty, token unlocks (e.g., linking to TokenUnlocks or CryptoRank), and what could break the thesis? A post that can’t find three risks is a pitch, not analysis.
• Regulatory reality: Warnings have been issued about misleading “finfluencer” promotions on social media and tightened rules on financial promotions. Transparent disclosures aren’t niceties—they’re necessary.

My credibility scorecard

I score any Medium crypto page in under two minutes. Use this to rate Coin and Crypto on a scale that’s simple and brutally fair.

• Transparency (0–2):

  • 0: Anonymous, no links, no bio
  • 1: Handle + some links, no methodology
  • 2: Real name/team, linked profiles, clear “about” or research approach

• Sources (0–2):

  • 0: Cites only blogs/Twitter threads
  • 1: Mix of secondary and some primary links
  • 2: Consistent primary sources (docs, repos, filings, on-chain data)

• Risk warnings (0–2):

  • 0: Hypey, no risks or disclaimers
  • 1: Generic disclaimer, minimal risk section
  • 2: Clear risks, “what could break,” and no “guarantees” language

• Track record (0–2):

  • 0: Predictions never revisited; dead links
  • 1: Occasional updates; mixed accuracy
  • 2: Corrections noted; outcomes revisited; updates dated

• Reader feedback (0–2):

  • 0: Comments off or ignored
  • 1: Some replies, little engagement
  • 2: Active responses, welcomes critique, clarifies errors

How to apply it fast: Open three recent posts, scan the bio, check links in the first five paragraphs, search the page for “sponsor,” “ref,” and “disclosure,” and look for an “updated on” line. Score it. A 7–10 means “follow with caution and verify.” Below 7? Bookmark one or two evergreen guides and move on.

One last sanity check I like: pick an older post that made a specific claim (e.g., a network upgrade timeline or a fee prediction). Did reality roughly match? Is there an edit note? Accuracy ages better than excitement.

If trust is the filter, the next question is practical: who actually gets value from following this page—beginners, traders, or builders? I’ll map that out next so you don’t add noise to your feed. Which camp are you in right now?

Who will actually benefit from following

Not every crypto page on Medium is worth your attention. The trick is matching what you’ll actually read and use with what the author reliably publishes. Here’s how I map the “Coin and Crypto” Medium page to different types of readers so you get value without noise.

“If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough.”

Beginners and casual learners

If you’re still figuring out wallets, gas fees, or the difference between L1s and L2s, this kind of page can be a great on-ramp—if the writing is plain-English and step-by-step.

What usually helps:

• Simple walk-throughs: “Set up a wallet and secure it with a hardware device,” “Swap on a DEX without getting front-run,” “Send stablecoins safely.” Look for screenshots, clear steps, and a visible last-updated date.
• Explainers with minimal jargon: “What is a bridge?” “How staking rewards work.” If you can read it without googling every third sentence, you’re in the right place.
• Security basics: Seed phrases, approvals, fake airdrops, and how to revoke permissions. This is non-negotiable. Scams still siphon billions each cycle; see the crime trends to ground your instincts.

What to skip for now:

• Yield-chasing and “passive income” posts that gloss over smart contract risk.
• Hot takes on micro-caps framed as “undervalued gems.” These are often thinly sourced or incentive-driven.

Quick rule of thumb: if a guide reduces anxiety and helps you perform a task safely on your first try, it’s worth it. If it spikes FOMO, close the tab.

Active traders and degen wallets

Market takes and listicles can be useful as a radar, not a trade trigger. The best posts for you are specific, falsifiable, and linked to primary data.

Posts that add value:

• Clear theses and invalidation: “Long if L2 fees stay under X for Y days, invalidated if TVL drops below Z.” If there’s no exit plan, it’s just hype.
• On-chain and order flow references: Links to Dune dashboards, Etherscan contracts, or liquidity maps. No links = low conviction.
• Context vs. calls: “Catalysts over the next 30 days” with sources beats “10 coins to 10x.”

Red flags for you:

• Listicles with affiliate links to exchanges, bots, or signal groups, especially when risk sections are missing or tiny.
• Backtests without methodology. If they show a chart of “this strategy wins,” but omit fees and slippage, assume it’s marketing.

Reality check: day trading is brutally hard. Research tracking retail traders shows the vast majority lose money; in one multi-year study, only about 1% of persistent day traders were profitable after costs. Treat Medium takes as inputs to your system, not the system itself.

Long-term investors and builders

If you care about durable edges, go for content that ages well—frameworks, mental models, and technical literacy that holds up when headlines fade.

What to prioritize:

• Token design and incentives: Supply schedules, emission sinks, lockups, real yield vs. printed yield. Posts should link to source or actual token contracts.
• Governance case studies: “What went right/wrong in X proposal,” “Delegate incentives and voter apathy.” Concrete examples beat armchair theory.
• Security primers: Allowances, multisig hygiene, bridge risk. Persistent security literacy prevents expensive mistakes.
• Market structure explainers: MEV basics, L2 sequencing, intents, DEX routing. This helps you evaluate products and teams with clearer eyes.

Builders benefit most when posts include code snippets, architecture diagrams, or links to repos and EIPs. If an article references a protocol mechanism without pointing to a spec, treat it as a primer, not a blueprint.

If this isn’t for you

Not every feed deserves a follow. You should skip or just bookmark a couple of evergreen guides if you notice:

• Thin sourcing: Big claims with no docs, no chains, no data.
• Heavy promotions: Referral codes, “partnerships,” or glowing language with zero counterpoints.
• Risk mismatch: Content pushes leverage or illiquid tokens while you’re building a conservative, long-term stack.
• Inconsistent publishing: Weeks of silence, then a flood of sponsored pieces—often a sign of shifting priorities.

Follow pages that help you make fewer mistakes, not just louder decisions. Your time is your edge. So how do you tell, fast, whether a post is worth reading before you waste 15 minutes on it?

Up next: I’ll walk you through a 5-minute scan that flags the title tricks, missing disclosures, and weak sources on the spot—so you only read what’s actually worth your time.

How to read their posts without getting burned

If a post on Medium makes you feel FOMO, pause. That feeling is a feature, not a bug. I read crypto content with a simple, repeatable system that filters hype fast, keeps me curious, and protects my stack.

“Trust, but verify.” — The best edge in crypto isn’t speed. It’s discipline.

5-minute scan method

I use a tight scan before giving any post a full read. It saves hours and avoids rabbit holes.

• Title: Is it specific or hypey? “1000x altcoin soon” is a skip. “How EigenLayer restaking affects L2 security” is worth a look.
• Date: Anything older than 6 months that’s market-specific? Treat it as history. For explainers, age can be fine if the tech hasn’t changed.
• Author: Real name? Links to X, LinkedIn, or GitHub? No profile info + strong calls to action = caution.
• Disclosures: Look for “I hold,” “sponsored,” or affiliate notes. If a post pushes a token or platform with no risks or disclosures, downrank it in your head.
• Sources: Are there links to docs, explorers, whitepapers, or audits? Or just other Medium posts?
• Takeaways: Can you sum it up in one sentence? If not, you may be reading word-fluff, not signal.

Tip backed by research: readers skim in an F-shaped pattern on the web, missing key details without structure. Scanning with a checklist improves retention and cuts mistakes.

Fact-check workflow

When a claim matters, I verify it with primary data. Here’s the fast lane.

• Token and on-chain stats:

  • Supply, holders, contracts: Etherscan, Solscan.
  • TVL and yields: DeFiLlama.
  • Protocol revenue/usage: Token Terminal, Dune.

• Announcements and partnerships:

  • Exchanges: Binance Announcements.
  • Oracles/infra: Chainlink blog.
  • Project news: official site, blog, or GitHub releases.

• Security and audits:

  • Audit links should go to the auditor’s website, not a screenshot.
  • Check for recent incidents or admin-key risks in docs and explorers.

• Time-sensitive claims:

  • “Listing soon” or “partnership confirmed” needs a source. No source? Treat as rumor.
  • Events: verify via CoinMarketCal and the project’s official X account.

Real example: a post says “APY is 80% on XYZ staking.” Check the protocol UI and contract. If TVL spiking from $2M to $200M overnight, look for emissions changes in docs or governance proposals. No explanation? That APY likely collapses fast.

Another example: “Partnered with Chainlink.” Confirm on Chainlink’s blog or the partner’s official site. If it only appears on one Medium post and nowhere else, it’s marketing language, not a partnership.

Remember: false or exaggerated claims spread faster than truth on social platforms. A well-known study found false news traveled “farther, faster, deeper.”

Turn reads into action (safely)

Posts should feed your process, not your next impulse trade.

• Create a watchlist, not a shopping list: Add tokens/protocols to a tracker with columns: claim, source link, what to verify, timeline, risks.
• Assign micro-tasks: “Read the latest audit,” “Check treasury runway on Token Terminal,” “Verify team on LinkedIn.”
• Use time locks: 24-hour cooling-off before any action. If it still looks good tomorrow, it’s usually better researched.
• Sandbox first: Try features with tiny amounts on a fresh wallet. Learn fee behavior, slippage, and permission prompts before size.
• Write risk notes: Admin keys? Oracle risk? Token unlocks? Note them next to the idea so enthusiasm doesn’t bulldoze caution.

Example: a post sells a new L2 bridge as “instant and cheap.” I test with $5 on a burner wallet, measure fees/time, and read the contract approvals. Many “instant” bridges are instant… until they aren’t during stress.

Bias traps to avoid

Good content can still lead you off course if your brain wants to hear “yes.” Here’s how I catch myself in the moment.

• Confirmation bias: If a post agrees with you, force a counterpoint. Ask: “What would prove this wrong?” Research shows we favor confirming info.
• Anchoring: First numbers stick. When you see “$10 target,” ignore it and rebuild an estimate from fundamentals or comparable metrics.
• Survivorship bias: Lists of “winning strategies” rarely mention the graveyard. Ask for the base rate: “Out of how many attempts?”
• Authority bias: Blue checks and big follower counts don’t equal due diligence. Treat big names as leads, not conclusions.
• Recency bias: Recent pumps feel safer than they are. Look at 180-day charts and unlock schedules before trusting momentum.
• Cherry-picked charts: If the timeframe starts exactly at a bottom, re-chart it. If a metric shows only up and to the right, ask for the other side (costs, dilution, churn).

Three quick questions I ask during any read:

• What’s the strongest opposing view?
• Which number, if wrong, breaks this thesis?
• Where’s the incentive—who wins if I act on this?

One more trick: if the post makes you feel rushed, step back. Fast emotion is often manufactured. Slow logic is where the edge lives.

Curious how to spot paid content or hidden incentives on Medium in under 10 seconds? That’s exactly what I’m breaking down next—want the checklist I use every day?

Disclosures, monetization, and ethics on Medium

If you’ve ever finished a crypto article and felt a quiet nudge to “click, sign up, claim,” that wasn’t an accident—it was an incentive at work. Medium makes it easy to publish, but it also makes it easy to sell. If you understand how authors get paid here, you’ll read with sharper instincts and fewer regrets.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

Common monetization paths

Most Medium crypto writers earn through one (or several) of these:

• Medium Partner Program (MPP): Authors earn from paying members’ reading time. This pushes content toward

  beginner-friendly explainers, listicles, and emotionally sticky headlines because more time = more pay.

  Signs you’re seeing MPP-focused content: a “Members-only” lock icon, a paywall prompt, and formatting that keeps you scrolling (long intros, subheads every few lines).

• Affiliate links and referrals: Common for exchanges, wallets, hardware, VPNs, and newsletters.

  Practical tell-tales:

  • Exchange patterns like binance.com/en/register?ref=XXXXXX or bybit.com/invite?ref=XXXXXX
  • Hardware wallets like ledger.com/?r=XXXX or trezor.io/?offer_id=…
  • UTM tags and trackers like ?utm_source=medium, ?aff=, ?via=, ?ref=
  • Copy that says “use my link,” “grab your bonus,” or “10% fee discount” with a special URL

  What it means for you: Coverage may lean positive to boost signups. That doesn’t make it bad—just judge the balance and the sources.

• Sponsored overviews or paid placements: A project pays for a write-up. Good authors label it clearly at the top with words like Sponsored, Ad, or Paid. Less honest ones bury the disclosure at the bottom or “thank a partner” without stating money changed hands.

• Courses, Discords, and newsletter upsells: The article “teases” value and funnels you to a paid community or course. Watch for Gumroad, Patreon, Linktree hubs full of premium offers, or “limited seats” countdowns.

• Airdrop/referral trees: “Invite 3 friends to unlock…” links can generate outsized income for authors. Sometimes they’re fine; sometimes they’re a phishing trap in disguise. Always check the domain carefully and confirm in official project channels.

Regulators care about this stuff. Requirements have been issued for clear and conspicuous disclosures—you should see them before or at the moment of persuasion, not hidden in footnotes. If you want receipts: check the endorsement guides and their quick primer, Disclosures 101. Research also shows disclosures help readers recognize ads and reduce blind trust—though they don’t erase bias entirely.

Spotting sponsored or paid content

Some posts telegraph their incentives if you know where to look. Here’s my quick sniff test:

• Language that sells, not informs: “Hidden gem,” “undervalued 100x,” “no-brainer,” “set to explode,” “guaranteed yield.”

  Honest research rarely sounds like a late-night infomercial.

• Only upsides, no risk section: If a token review skips token supply, unlock schedules, treasury wallets, audit gaps, or regulatory risk, assume the incentives lean promotional.

• CTA-heavy structure: Multiple buttons or bold links to “Sign up,” “Claim now,” “Get bonus,” each with tracking parameters.

• Disclosure location trick: A vague “This post may contain affiliate links” line in tiny text at the very bottom.

  Disclosures should be hard to miss—top of article is best practice.

• Timing and tone: Posts published right before an IDO/listing with breathless price talk, cherry-picked charts, or selective timeframes (only the bullish frame).

• Author opacity: No last name, no LinkedIn/X, comments ignored. The less traceable the author, the more caution you should apply.

Two real-world style examples I see a lot:

• “Top 7 exchanges for 2025 (with discounts)” — Every “pick” includes a referral link; the “cons” are soft (“UI can be confusing”) and risk sections are missing. Education? Maybe. Sales page? Definitely.

• “Project X: Why it will 10x this year” — Glowing adjectives, no discussion of token unlocks or treasury distribution, ends with “Join the airdrop here” via a questionable domain. That’s not analysis—that’s a funnel.

What I expect from responsible authors

If you’re going to trust someone’s crypto writing, this is the baseline I look for:

• Upfront, plain-English disclosures: Put it at the top. “I may earn a commission if you sign up. Opinions are my own.” No euphemisms.
• Clear “Sponsored” labels for paid posts: In the title and first paragraph. No burying, no weasel words.
• Balanced pros and cons: A visible risk section with specifics: token supply, unlocks, audit status, KYC/geo limits, smart contract risks, and what could break the thesis.
• Primary sources linked: Whitepaper/docs, audit reports, on-chain addresses, governance proposals, listings announcements, and official GitHub or blog posts.
• Holdings and timing policy: State what you hold, and include a simple cooling-off rule (e.g., “I won’t trade this asset within 7 days of publishing”).
• No pressure tactics: Avoid countdowns, “limited time,” or social proof gimmicks (“10,000 readers already claimed!”). Let the research sell itself.
• Real risk education: Especially when linking to contracts, bridges, or airdrop claim pages—note permissions, revoke steps, and phishing patterns.
• “Not financial advice” plus context: Don’t hide behind a throwaway line. Pair it with what to verify and how to verify it.

Here’s a simple disclosure block I love seeing at the top of crypto posts:

Disclosure: This article contains referral links to A and B. If you sign up, I may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. I did not accept payment for this review, and the sponsor did not get editorial approval. I held 200 XYZ at publication and won’t trade this position for 7 days after posting. Nothing here is financial advice. Primary sources: whitepaper, audit, governance thread.

One last thing about Medium specifically: because MPP rewards “engaged time,” some writers unintentionally optimize for suspense over substance. Long intros, dramatic hooks, and serial cliffhangers keep readers scrolling—but they can also bury the facts you need. It’s fine to enjoy the storytelling; just make sure you can find the sources and the risks without a magnifying glass.

If incentives can tilt content, which kinds of posts are actually worth your attention and tend to age well instead of going stale with the next headline? I’ll map that out next—want a short list you can bookmark?

Best types of articles to look for on their page

Evergreen explainers and step-by-step guides

If you only have time for a few reads, go for the pieces that still matter six months from now. I’m talking about how-tos that make you faster, safer, and less error-prone the next time you open your wallet.

What you'll learn in the next few minutes

• Wallet setup that goes beyond “download and click.” A great guide shows:

  • How to create a non-custodial wallet and confirm you wrote the seed correctly (with offline checks).
  • Never hardware wallets (Ledger, Trezor) reduce signing risk and how to pair them with your hot wallet.
  • How to use wallet simulation (e.g., Rabby or MetaMask simulations) so you see what a transaction will do before you sign.

• DEX swaps, fees, and slippage explained with screenshots. The best ones:

  • Show what gas, priority fees, and slippage actually change—and when to adjust them.
  • Explain router behavior (e.g., why a trade splits across pools) with a quick peek at the route preview.
  • Link to a post-trade proof on Etherscan or a block explorer so you can verify.

• Staking and yield walkthroughs with risk labels. Useful guides compare:

  • Native staking vs. liquid staking (e.g., LSTs like stETH, rETH) and what could break each path.
  • Unstaking timelines, rate variance, and smart contract risks with links to audits or docs.

• Bridging basics that teach judgment, not just clicks. Look for:

  • Trusted (canonical) bridges vs. third-party bridges and what trust assumptions you actually make.
  • Test tx advice for small amounts and how to check confirmations and finality on the destination chain.

What good looks like: step-by-step screenshots, links to primary docs, a “what could go wrong” box, and a quick verification step at the end.

Security and scam awareness

I want pieces that help you see trouble coming a mile away. Patterns repeat. A sharp article makes them obvious so you don’t have to learn the hard way.

• Phishing and fake airdrop playbooks. Clear warning signs:

  • “Urgent claim” links from DMs, Discord mods, or unofficial sites—always cross-check on the project’s real domain.
  • Transactions that want broad token approvals or “Permit” signatures you didn’t expect—use revoke.cash or Etherscan’s Token Approval Checker to review what you’ve granted.
  • QR scams that try to trigger a blind mobile signature.

• Seed phrase handling that’s brutally practical.

  • Never type a seed into a website, never store it in screenshots or cloud notes, and don’t take photos. If a guide doesn’t say this, skip it.
  • Never metal backups for long-term storage, and consider a passphrase (25th word) if you understand the responsibility trade-offs.

• Social engineering breakdowns. Fake team accounts, deepfake AMAs, and impostor “support.” Good posts show real case studies and how the attackers framed urgency.

“Security is a process, not a product.” — Bruce Schneier

Independent research backs the need for vigilance: industry reports consistently show scams and phishing as major loss vectors year after year. See the Crypto Crime Report and annual security reports for patterns you’ll recognize in the wild.

What good looks like: specific examples with transaction hashes, screenshots of the malicious flow, and a checklist you can use the next time a “too good” campaign trends.

On-chain and market structure explainers

These articles sharpen your judgment across cycles. When you understand the plumbing, you don’t get pushed around by headlines.

• How DEXs route trades.

  • AMM basics (constant product) vs. concentrated liquidity (e.g., Uniswap v3) with visuals and Uniswap docs links.
  • Why aggregators (1inch, 0x) split routes and how price impact, fees, and pool depth interact.

• L2 fees explained in plain English.

  • What you actually pay for: execution + data availability.
  • How EIP-4844 blobs changed cost dynamics and when fees still spike.

• MEV 101 that’s not scare-mongering.

  • Sandwich, backrun, and arbitrage—what they are, how to spot them in mempool explorers.
  • How private orderflow and relays (e.g., Flashbots Protect) reduce risk for certain trades.

• Stablecoins and peg mechanics.

  • Redeemability vs. purely algorithmic designs, collateral transparency, and why peg breaks start on liquidity edges.

• Bridges and messaging risk.

  • Lock/mint vs. burn/mint, multisig trust, and what “canonical” really means for each ecosystem.

What good looks like: simple diagrams, references to primary sources (EIPs, protocol docs), and a quick “verify it yourself” section using a block explorer or analytics screenshot.

Red flags: what to skip

Time is your edge. Don’t burn it on content that won’t pass a basic sniff test.

• Unverifiable “insider alpha.” If there’s no on-chain evidence, no official announcement, and no sources—pass.
• Guaranteed yields or “risk-free” anything. If the rate is the headline and risks are an afterthought, it’s an ad in disguise.
• Zero-risk sections missing. If a post sells upside without a single paragraph on smart contract, liquidity, or counterparty risk, it’s not for you.
• Heavy referrals with light research. Walls of affiliate links, almost no methodology, and cherry-picked charts are a tell.
• Backtests without methodology. If you can’t see assumptions, sample period, and fees, the results are storytelling.
• Charts with no labels or sources. Pretty doesn’t equal true.

A quick stress-test I use: If you removed every promo code, would the thesis still stand? If the answer is “not really,” close the tab.

Want to make these reads even safer and faster to verify? I’ve got a short toolkit and a few complementary sources that turn any article into a cross-checked, bias-resistant insight—ready for the next section?

Smart complements if you need more than one source

Mix of formats to balance bias

One source gives you a take; a balanced stack gives you context. Here’s the simple content mix I keep so one writer never shapes my view.

• Primary sources: project docs and GitHub repos are the closest thing to ground truth. Read the docs, then scan the issues and pull requests to see what’s actually being built. Check governance where it exists:

  • Docs/whitepapers: look on the official site or GitHub Wiki
  • Governance votes: Snapshot and Tally
  • Code and releases: GitHub

• Newsletters: pick 1–2 so you don’t drown. For high-signal summaries and links to primary data, go to the free tiers from Messari and The Defiant.
• Podcasts: they expose you to opposing views while you commute. Unchained (Laura Shin) for interviews; Bankless and Colossus crypto for frameworks.
• Research hubs: when you want depth over hype, go to people publishing methods and data:

  • L2BEAT for L2 security models and upgrade keys
  • Paradigm and a16z crypto for research essays
  • Flashbots for MEV and market structure
  • Ethereum Foundation Blog for protocol-level updates

• Data dashboards: sanity-check narratives with numbers:

  • DeFiLlama for TVL, fees, stablecoin flows
  • Dune for community analytics (read the methodology!)
  • Token Terminal (free tier) for protocol revenue and users

“Read laterally.” Research shows that checking other tabs while you read is one of the fastest ways to avoid misinformation. Open a second source, then a third, before you form an opinion.

There’s also a hard truth: false news is tend to spread faster than truth on social platforms. That’s your cue to build a habit: one explainer, one data point, one primary source—every time.

Tools that help you verify

Here’s my quick toolkit and what I check in under a minute:

• Explorers:

  Etherscan,

  Solscan,

  Blockscout

  • What to check: contract address matches the official site; top holders concentration; recent transfers; if it’s a proxy, who controls upgrades (Contract tab > Read as Proxy).
  • Example: a post claims “25% supply burned.” Open the token on Etherscan, hit “Holders,” look for the burn address (0x000…dead) balance change, and confirm the percentage vs. total supply.

• On-chain analytics:

  Dune,

  DeFiLlama

  • What to check: does usage (tx count, fees, TVL) support the narrative? Is the dashboard author credible and transparent about queries?
  • Example: “TVL doubled this week!” Confirm on DeFiLlama and see if it’s a chain reclassification or a one-off airdrop farm.

• Token schedules:

  TokenUnlocks

  • What to check: upcoming unlocks that could pressure price; team/investor cliffs.
  • Example: an article pitches a 12-month thesis—notice a 30% unlock in 3 weeks and adjust expectations.

• L2 risk profile:

  L2BEAT Risk

  • What to check: upgrade keys, training wheels, censorship risk.
  • Example: claims of “fully decentralized security” often crumble when you see a 2-of-2 multisig with pause power.

• Governance reality:

  Snapshot,

  Tally,

  project forums

  • What to check: was a proposal actually passed? What was the quorum and breakdown?
  • Example: a “DAO approved” treasury move might have 0.8% voter participation—note that before you celebrate.

• Historical truth serum:

  Wayback Machine

  • What to check: whether a page or article was edited after backlash.
  • Example: a post originally promised “guaranteed yield”? The current version says “target APY.” The archive shows the change.

30-second habit: read the post, open the explorer, glance at Llama, scan governance, check Wayback if it feels too neat. If two tabs disagree with the writer, you just saved yourself a headache.

When to follow vs. bookmark

Not every page deserves a follow. Here’s how I decide fast:

• Follow when:

  • Posts are consistent (at least monthly) and timestamped
  • Cites primary sources and links data dashboards
  • Flags risks and avoids certainty language
  • Engages in comments or updates mistakes

• Bookmark only when:

  • Great evergreen explainers, but sporadic posting
  • Strong takes with weak sourcing
  • Heavy promo or affiliate push mixed into otherwise decent guides

If you’re unsure, run a habit: mute every other crypto source for one week. If this page alone keeps you informed and calm, follow. If you feel blind spots or hype creep, go back to the mixed stack above.

Want a quick yes/no checklist to decide in under a minute—and answers to the questions I’m asked most about this page? That’s next.

FAQ: quick answers people ask about Coin and Crypto on Medium

Common questions I get

• Is “Coin and Crypto” legit? It can be. I trust it when I see real authorship, primary sources, and clear disclosures. If you only see opinions with no links, I treat it as entertainment, not research.
• Who writes it? Check the Medium bio and linked profiles. A real name, an active X/LinkedIn, and past work you can verify are green flags. A blank bio and no footprint is a pass for me.
• Is it financial advice? Assume education only. If you see trading calls without risk notes, slow down.
• Is it free? Many posts are free. Medium sometimes adds a paywall for members-only stories. You’ll know when you hit it.
• How often do they post? Scroll the page and skim dates. A healthy feed shows recent activity and consistent themes. Months of silence usually means you should bookmark a couple of good guides and move on.
• Are there conflicts? Look for lines like “This post may contain affiliate links,” “Sponsored by,” or “Use my referral.” That doesn’t make it bad, but it changes how I weigh claims. Requirements say disclosures should be clear and hard to miss—hold authors to that.
• How do I verify claims fast? Match any technical or token claim to a primary source:

  • Project docs or GitHub for feature claims
  • Official announcements on the project’s X/blog
  • Block explorers (e.g., Etherscan, Solscan) for supply, contracts, or wallet activity

  Example: If a story says “Token supply is capped at 100M,” check the token contract and emissions schedule in docs or the explorer. If a post claims “Protocol X integrated Chainlink,” ask both sides.

• Should beginners follow? Yes—if posts are clear, sourced, and include risks. Start with evergreen guides and security basics.
• Can traders use it? Only as one input. Use it to build watchlists and hypotheses, not to push buy/sell buttons. Warnings are issued about trading purely on social-media narratives for a reason.

Real sample cues to trust: “Here’s the doc page,” “Contract: 0x…,” “Risks: volatility, smart-contract bugs, liquidity,” “No affiliation; opinions are my own.”

Real sample cues to skip: “Guaranteed yield,” “Next 100x,” zero links, or a wall of referrals.

Quick decision checklist

• Primary sources? Docs, explorers, GitHub, or official posts linked—not just other blogs.
• Risks listed? Smart-contract risk, token unlocks, liquidity, regulatory, or market structure. At least a short risk box.
• Clear disclosures? Look for “sponsored,” “partner,” or “affiliate.” If you sense promo but see no disclosure, that’s a red flag.
• Balanced tone? Pros and cons, not only upside. Hype language = caution.
• Author engagement? Comments answered, welcomes critique, clarifies errors.

Score it in seconds: If 4–5 boxes are yes, follow. If 2 or fewer, bookmark a useful guide and keep your feed clean.

Why a checklist? Simple checklists cut mistakes in high-variance fields—there’s strong evidence from other domains on checklists. Crypto research benefits from the same idea: fewer snap judgments, more consistent decisions.

If you still can’t decide

• Run a 2-week trial. Follow the page and read three posts: one explainer, one market take, one project piece.
• Time-box it. 10 minutes per post: 5-minute scan, 5-minute verify (one claim each via docs or an explorer).
• Track one prediction. Screenshot the claim and check it a week later. Was it accurate or quietly edited? Use the Wayback Machine if you need proof of changes.
• Score with the checklist. If the content saved you time and sharpened your view, keep it in your feed. If it added noise, unfollow.

Final take

Bottom line: “Coin and Crypto” on Medium can be useful when posts are transparent, sourced, and practical for your goals. Use the quick scan, verify the big claims, and never act on a single article—especially in a market that punishes fast, emotional decisions.

I’ll publish the full review here: Cryptolinks.com/news/. Bookmark it so you’ve always got a clean, hype-free way to judge any crypto source you find next.