The Three-Filter Scam Test
Spot crypto pump-and-dumps before you ape in.
- Difficulty
- Moderate
- Time to result
- ~ongoing to results
- Steps
- 5
- Confidence
- 90%
Kevin Rose's method for separating legitimate blockchain and NFT projects from hype-driven scams. Rather than reacting to price momentum or social buzz, he runs every new project through three filters: whether it solves a genuine use case, whether the team behind it is credible, and — most tellingly — what the community actually talks about. If the dominant conversation is price appreciation rather than the underlying technology or roadmap, he treats that as the clearest signal of a pump-and-dump. The framework doesn't guarantee accuracy, but it gives investors a repeatable lens to apply before committing capital, and it can be reapplied over time as projects (or their communities) evolve.
Origin
Extracted from Acquired
Core principles
- 01Legitimate projects solve a real problem, not just ride a trend
- 02Team credibility matters as much as the idea itself
- 03The dominant topic of community conversation reveals a project's true motives
How to run it
- 1
Identify the underlying use case
Ask whether the project solves a genuine problem or need, rather than just capitalizing on a trend.
Pro tip Look for language describing what's broken and how the tech fixes it, not just marketing about the token.
- 2
Vet the team's credibility
Research who is building the project and whether they have relevant experience or a track record.
- 3
Listen to what the community actually discusses
Spend time in the project's community channels and note whether the dominant topic is price/mooning or the technology and roadmap.
Watch out If price talk dominates the discourse, treat that as a red flag.
- 4
Weigh the three signals together
If use case and team are weak but conversation is all about price, assume high pump-and-dump risk and avoid or minimize exposure.
- 5
Revisit periodically
Some joke or early projects can evolve real utility over time, so reassess rather than permanently writing something off.
Pro tip Track whether a community's stated original intent (like tipping or good deeds) is still being honored as it grows.
In the wild
Kevin points out Dogecoin launched with a genuine use case — tipping people for good deeds on Reddit — with a huge supply specifically so it wouldn't be hoarded. Many later meme-coin clones copied the format purely to ride price appreciation, without a comparable community purpose.
→ Kevin treats original Dogecoin as passing his filter while dismissing most copycats as pump-and-dump risks.
Common mistakes
Judging by hype alone
Assuming a project is legitimate just because it has a large following, without checking use case or team.
Ignoring the community's tone
Failing to notice when a community's conversation has shifted almost entirely to price speculation.
Is it for you?
Best for
Angel investors, retail crypto buyers, and NFT collectors screening new projects before investing.
Not ideal for
Extremely early-stage projects with no public community discourse yet to observe.
From the transcript
“when I evaluate new cryptocurrency projects, I always look through the lens of one, is there a use case here that needs to be solved…”
“It was meant to be a cryptocurrency that could be used as a way to more or less give away for good deeds.”
From the episode
Kevin Rose from Web 2.0 to Web3
Kevin Rose