Discussions about projects like LISTA on major communities and social platforms are diverse and varied. Some raise genuine technical concerns, while others spread unnecessary panic. Learning to distinguish between the two is crucial for protecting your assets.

There are several key characteristics of truly warning-worthy risk signals. First, they are verifiable—such as specific technical issues pointed out by developers or auditing teams (reentrancy bugs, logical flaws, etc.), with clear code locations and detailed descriptions. Second, data anomalies—like sudden significant fluctuations in TVL without any official announcements—are often signs that warrant attention. Third, the credibility of the information source matters—voices from core project developers, reputable auditing firms, or verified security researchers carry more weight.

In contrast, false FUD often follows a different pattern. You might see emotionally charged statements ("The project is doomed," "It will definitely explode"), but lacking any technical details to support them. Accusations tend to be vague ("The team has issues") and lack concrete evidence. There are also some screenshots and hearsay from unknown sources, making it hard to distinguish truth from falsehood.

When encountering negative information, consider the following approach: First, trace the source—who originally shared this information? Second, cross-verify through multiple trusted channels. Third, calmly assess whether it has any substantial impact on your investment logic. Rational thinking and not following the crowd are the secrets to long-term survival in this market.