Urban dictionary, the popular online dictionary for slang and phrases, has approved the definition of the word Shitcoiner.
The definition was authored by BTC Sessions, a Twitter user, who defined Shitcoiner as “individuals who either through ignorance or malice accumulates and/or promotes worthless digital tokens.”
BTC Sessions also took steps further to elaborate more about Shitcoiners, who have continued to ignore warnings from professional cryptocurrency experts about the risks involved with this type of investment.
Though the word just gained approval by the famous online dictionary, shitcoiner has been widely used in the crypto space. The term is used to describe a person who promotes worthless digital tokens, also known as shitcoins.
The term became widely known in 2017 during the massive boom of initial coin offerings (ICO) that saw several investors opting for different crypto projects with little to no attention being paid to the use cases of the token.
People who were looking for quicker gains did not care about other details of the project, they only showed interest in buying tokens with low market capitalization, as they hoped that its price would increase in the near future.
While it has worked for some investors, several others were hugely disappointed as their quest for quicker returns resulted in major losses.
Some of the rationale behind “shilling shitcoins” were captured by the author in the example given.
Most people who missed out on getting Bitcoin (BTC) when its price was still low are eagerly looking for shortcuts to make massive gains.
With various crypto projects launching in a few months and turning average income earners into overnight millionaires, people are ignoring all warnings and investing in every low-capped token, as they “hope it will one day be the next Bitcoin.”
Although tokens like Dogecoin (DOGE) and Shiba Inu (SHIB), which were originally viewed as shitcoins, have seen major investors throw their weight behind them, thus giving other retail investors the belief that the coin is different.
