A pseudonym is a fictitious name used to conceal someone's true identity. Traditionally, writers, artists, and performers have used them for privacy, safety, or creative expression.

In crypto, however, pseudonyms are also used by scammers and crypto has a serious scammer problem.

A couple of months ago, when frames were gaining traction and the Warpcast digital wallet was launched, I saw a post from @V asking for feedback on the mini apps. I had simple feedback: I'd feel more comfortable if the mini app developers were doxxed. I know that's a controversial take from a Gen X but here's my reasoning. As someone helping onboard Latin Americans into Farcaster, I'd hate for any of them to get scammed while using this protocol. 

I remember 2021, when I first encountered NFTs and had to figure out Discord. I wasn't a gamer and had never used Discord before. The first time I opened the app, I got overwhelmed and closed it immediately. This happened five or six times before I forced myself to learn it. Once I did, I joined many projects, some were great, others terrible. In some I made money; others were run by inexperienced teams who mismanaged funds after a successful mint ultimately failed. And then there were the scams, some impressively deceptive.

Scammers would clone project websites and launch just before the real mint. They'd DM people on Discord claiming they were whitelisted early. Many fell for it, connected wallets, sent funds and got nothing in return. This happened to me with a $1,200 NFT, a horrible feeling I won't forget. Many people who were scammed left the space and never came back.

Fast forward to 2024: I discovered Warpcast. I joined on January 31st, but in my slow way of processing, I didn't actually become active until May 2024. The value proposition was compelling: a decentralized protocol (well, semi-decentralized, joking but not, u know). It felt exciting to be early. When they launched Warpcast Wallet, I thought it was revolutionary. Combining social media with a digital wallet could really simplify onboarding.

But then I wondered: is there any control over who can create mini apps? Since it's semi-decentralized and permissionless, could a scammer launch a mini app, hype it up, and then disappear with users' funds? That felt like a red flag. I don't keep much money in my Warpcast wallet, so it's not a big deal for me, but if the goal is growth, especially with new users, how are they protected from scammers? I want to onboard more people, but security remains a concern. Then again, maybe I'm overthinking it.

Then came FarCon! full of energy and showcasing great work from all the builders. The magic of meeting in real life reminded us why in-person connections beat online interactions. Unexpectedly, a scammer was exposed during the event. I wanted to write about this at the time but held back, not wanting to dampen the positive vibes.

For the record, I believe in second chances. We're all human and make mistakes, so everyone should have a chance to redeem themselves. In this case, the person had returned funds he stole a few years back and late last year helped build one of the best projects in the Farcaster. I won't name the project, as I'm not here to spread FUD. However, this individual was working under a different pseudonym than the one he used years earlier. Had he not shown up at FarCon, he might still be building under that new identity, with no one knowing he had previously attempted to scam his own team out of $350,000. A few weeks later, it seems that's all in the rearview mirror. But could that person now be using yet another pseudonym??

This past weekend brought disturbing news: someone was kidnapped in NYC for weeks, targeted for their crypto wallet. The victim, an Italian national visiting the NYC, was fortunate enough to escape. But serious questions remain: Did he know the real name of the person he was meeting for business? Did he tell anyone back home who he was meeting? Was he meeting someone's real identity or a pseudonym?

It's chilling to think what could have happened if he hadn't escaped. If he had known the person's real identity and his family had that information, or just a calendar entry with the name, they might have reported him missing sooner. Apparently, there's still a third suspect unaccounted for; do authorities even know that 3rd person's real name?

I understand that cryptography is fundamentally about privacy, but if someone is building mini-apps on a protocol intended for mainstream users, how do we ensure they're held accountable and don't simply disappear behind a pseudonym?

I would love to hear your thoughts and feedback!