The incident highlighted the tension between Base’s “permissionless” nature and the ethical responsibility public figures carry when endorsing specific on-chain assets.
Base co-founder Jesse Pollak is facing sharp criticism after publicly promoting a meme token linked to rapper Soulja Boy. The post, shared on X, highlighted a creator payout feature on Base and pointed users toward a newly issued token on the network. Almost immediately, the reaction turned heated. Many community members questioned why a senior figure tied to Coinbase-backed Base would amplify a celebrity with a controversial crypto history.
The debate spread fast, pulling in developers, on-chain investigators and long-time traders. At the center of the backlash is trust. For many users, Base positions itself as a serious on-chain ecosystem. Promoting meme tokens tied to past scandals cuts against that image.
Blockchain investigator ZachXBT directly challenged Jesse Pollak’s decision. He asked why Soulja Boy was being given visibility at all. ZachXBT pointed to his own 2023 research, which documented 73 crypto promotions and 16 NFT launches tied to the rapper. According to that research, many of those projects collapsed or were alleged scams.
Those old threads resurfaced quickly. Specifically, screenshots circulated and quotes were reposted. The tone was blunt. Indeed, critics argued that this history is well known and hard to ignore. For them, the issue was not legality alone; rather, it was a responsibility. In fact, giving exposure to someone with repeated failed projects, they argued, risks pulling new users into the same cycle. Some went further. They suggested that platform leaders should apply higher standards than everyday users, especially when newcomers often follow signals from well-known builders.
Defenders of Jesse Pollak leaned on a familiar argument. Base is permissionless. Anyone can deploy. Anyone can promote. Tools are neutral. That explanation did little to calm critics. Many replied that neutrality feels thin when a co-founder actively boosts a token. They argued that leadership attention is not the same as passive infrastructure.
Others noted that Base still earns fees regardless of outcomes. In that framing, chaos becomes profitable. Accountability becomes optional. The sarcasm was heavy, and the memes followed. Some users also pointed out that Jesse Pollak previously launched his own creator coin. That comparison fueled claims of double standards and selective concern.
This episode highlights a deeper tension in crypto. Permissionless systems promise openness. At the same time, public figures carry influence whether they want it or not. For builders, the line between “anyone can use this” and “I endorse this” is thin. Once crossed, conversely, reactions are fast and unforgiving. Now, for this reason, Base finds itself in that spotlight. No regulator stepped in, nor was any token halted. Still, reputational damage does not need enforcement; it spreads socially.
Currently, Jesse Pollak has not issued a detailed response to the criticism. Meanwhile, the conversation continues. Some see this as overblown drama. Others see it as another warning sign. Either way, the message from the community is clear. Infrastructure may be neutral. Influence is not.
