[cuteboy19]

People shilling crypto are heavily incentivised to cover up the negatives or pretend they don't exist. Every crypto news site is basically paid news. Even when they publish negative articles, it's usually because they are shilling an alternative. The journalism quality is terrible.

The site is probably the most neutral crypto view out there, just because the author has no perverse incentive

[dqv]

>The site is probably the most neutral crypto view out there, just because the author has no perverse incentive

"Most neutral" is a weasel word and incentives aren't solely monetary. The author not having any obvious incentives is not the same as having no perverse incentives.

When they start grappling with someone in the same "weight class" (rather than some NYT author who has a journalist's level of understanding) and open themselves up to rebuttal, then "most neutral" might start to make sense. As it stands now, it's just preaching to a choir of crypto skeptics.

[cuteboy19]

What other incentives could there be? They aren't doing it for money or fame. Maybe you could come up with some irrational reasons.

I am not saying that she is perfectly neutral. That is not possible. I am just saying that the most neutral source of information on crypto that you can find often comes from sceptics, just because they aren't the ones being paid to lie.