- Trending
- Comments
- Latest
A new Litecoin influencer feud erupted on X (formerly Twitter) after the project’s official account posted, “I say the quiet parts out loud but we all should.” The comment drew a sharp response from Ben Cowen, CEO of ITC Crypto, who shared a chart highlighting Litecoin’s declining market performance.
What began as a discussion of technical analysis quickly spiraled into mockery. Litecoin’s account posted a photo of Cowen’s receding hairline with the caption, “the quiet part,” shifting the exchange from market debate to personal ridicule.
Cowen responded with humor, claiming, “I lost all my hair trying to convince Litecoiners to convert to Bitcoin. A small price to pay for the greater good.”
The Litecoin influencer feud escalated as the two parties exchanged increasingly absurd comparisons. Litecoin quipped that Cowen’s head resembled “the great recession,” to which Cowen shot back, “Your marketcap reminds me of the great recession.” The back-and-forth ended with Litecoin suggesting Cowen “could use a cap.”
Dash, another cryptocurrency project, joined the fray by commenting, “Price chart instantly means you’ve lost the argument.” Cowen countered by pointing out Dash’s own struggles, noting the token had fallen “99% against Litecoin,” and advising the project to “sit this one out.”
“The exchange shows how quickly legitimate debates can turn into brand-bashing spectacles,” said Maya Alvarez, a digital assets strategist at Chainanalysis. “For investors, it’s a reminder that social media theatrics don’t always reflect underlying fundamentals.”
This is not the first Litecoin influencer feud to make headlines. The project’s official account has engaged in several heated exchanges this year, including a clash with the XRP community in late August.
That feud began when Litecoin compared XRP to the smell of comets described as “rotten eggs, urine, burning matches, and almonds.” The post further mocked Ripple’s institutional adoption claims, referring to CEO Brad Garlinghouse as “Brad Garlicmouse” and dismissing XRP’s banking narrative as “an illusion.”
“While humor is part of crypto culture, this pattern of feuds risks alienating serious investors,” said Oliver Grant, partner at a London-based fintech consultancy. “The Litecoin influencer feud episodes might boost short-term visibility but could undermine long-term credibility.”
Other incidents include jabs at Ethereum supporters earlier this year, where Litecoin’s account mocked Ethereum gas fees during a period of high network congestion. The post compared ETH users to “waiting in line at an overpriced coffee shop,” drawing sharp responses from Ethereum developers. This back-and-forth created a viral moment, but again, it centered more on memes than substantive debate.
In July, Litecoin also stirred controversy by suggesting Dogecoin’s popularity was purely a product of “celebrity tweets,” an indirect reference to Elon Musk. The Dogecoin community retaliated with their own memes, creating another Litecoin influencer feud that trended for days but offered little discussion of adoption or technology.
Such repeated incidents demonstrate a pattern where the project leverages satire and confrontation to maintain relevance. While some community members view these tactics as playful, critics argue that reliance on mockery could reflect deeper struggles in establishing competitive advantages through innovation.
The rise of the Litecoin influencer feud and similar clashes reflects a growing reliance on provocative marketing strategies in the digital asset sector. With over 10,000 active tokens competing for investor attention, projects increasingly leverage social media disputes to remain visible.
Industry observers note that controversy can amplify engagement but may also distract from product development or utility. In Litecoin’s case, the coin continues to face challenges competing with newer, higher-speed networks despite its strong brand recognition and history as one of Bitcoin’s earliest forks.
For investors, the Litecoin influencer feud is a case study in the blurred line between community-driven marketing and reputational risk. As social media becomes a battleground for crypto credibility, market participants must distinguish between noise and substance.
Some experts argue that feuds are a form of guerrilla marketing.
“When resources for traditional advertising are limited, a viral exchange can create exposure that money can’t buy,” said Priya Deshmukh, a blockchain marketing strategist. “The Litecoin influencer feud strategy may look reckless, but it ensures people are talking about the project.”
Others warn that controversy often carries diminishing returns. While early disputes can spark visibility, repeated reliance on mockery risks painting a project as unserious. Over time, this can make partnerships with institutions, regulators, and serious investors more difficult to secure.
Ultimately, the question is whether visibility gained from controversy translates into lasting adoption. For Litecoin, the Litecoin influencer feud may keep the project in headlines, but it does not resolve questions about its competitiveness in a fast-moving crypto market dominated by newer, more scalable blockchains.
