GAYLE_
--
When Performance Is Ignored, A CreatorPad Transparency Issue😞
Over the past few months, I have actively participated in multiple Binance CreatorPad campaigns, including @Lorenzo Protocol , @Falcon Finance , @APRO Oracle , and @KITE AI . In each of these campaigns, I ranked strongly and delivered consistent performance based on the platform’s visible metrics.
In the most recent Lorenzo Protocol campaign, I remained in the Top 3 of the 30-day leaderboard. This was not a short-term spike or a temporary placement. It was sustained performance built through original research, human-written analysis, and continuous effort.
Despite this, my ranking was removed suddenly.
There was no warning, no explanation, and no communication from the platform. One day the rank was there. The next day, it was gone.
The issue is not about losing a position. Rankings can change, and platforms have every right to enforce their rules. The real issue is the complete lack of transparency around how and why such decisions are made, especially after long-term performance has already been established.
After my removal, I reviewed the posts that replaced my position on the leaderboard. Several of these top-ranked posts, when tested through commonly used AI detection tools, showed high levels of AI-generated content, ranging approximately between 70 and 85 percent out of 100. Despite this, those posts remained ranked and eligible.
This raises a fundamental question about consistency.
If AI-assisted or AI-generated content is allowed on CreatorPad, creators deserve clear confirmation of that policy. If it is restricted or penalized, then enforcement must be consistent across all participants. Selective or silent enforcement creates confusion and damages trust.
What makes this situation more concerning is that it is not isolated. I experienced similar unexplained ranking drops or removals in previous CreatorPad campaigns for Falcon Finance, APRO, and GoKiteAI. Each time, the pattern was the same: strong performance followed by a sudden change, with no explanation provided.
Creators invest real time and effort into these campaigns. We research, write, revise, and publish content that helps projects gain visibility and credibility. This is not casual work. It is contribution.
When rankings are altered without communication, it sends a message that creator effort is disposable. Over time, this discourages honest participation and rewards uncertainty instead of quality.
This article is not written to accuse individuals or attack the platform. It is written to highlight a structural problem. A creator ecosystem cannot function properly without transparency, consistent standards, and basic communication.
The solution is simple.
If a rule was violated, explain it.
If a system recalculation occurred, communicate it.
If an error was made, correct it.
Binance CreatorPad has the opportunity to strengthen trust by addressing cases like this directly and fairly. Restoring rightful rankings where mistakes occurred, or clearly explaining decisions where they did not, would go a long way toward reinforcing confidence in the platform.
Creators are not asking for special treatment.
We are asking for clarity, fairness, and accountability.Those are not optional features of a healthy system.They are the foundation of it.
@Karin Veri @Daniel Zou (DZ) 🔶 @Richard Teng
In the most recent Lorenzo Protocol campaign, I remained in the Top 3 of the 30-day leaderboard. This was not a short-term spike or a temporary placement. It was sustained performance built through original research, human-written analysis, and continuous effort.
Despite this, my ranking was removed suddenly.
There was no warning, no explanation, and no communication from the platform. One day the rank was there. The next day, it was gone.
The issue is not about losing a position. Rankings can change, and platforms have every right to enforce their rules. The real issue is the complete lack of transparency around how and why such decisions are made, especially after long-term performance has already been established.
After my removal, I reviewed the posts that replaced my position on the leaderboard. Several of these top-ranked posts, when tested through commonly used AI detection tools, showed high levels of AI-generated content, ranging approximately between 70 and 85 percent out of 100. Despite this, those posts remained ranked and eligible.
This raises a fundamental question about consistency.
If AI-assisted or AI-generated content is allowed on CreatorPad, creators deserve clear confirmation of that policy. If it is restricted or penalized, then enforcement must be consistent across all participants. Selective or silent enforcement creates confusion and damages trust.
What makes this situation more concerning is that it is not isolated. I experienced similar unexplained ranking drops or removals in previous CreatorPad campaigns for Falcon Finance, APRO, and GoKiteAI. Each time, the pattern was the same: strong performance followed by a sudden change, with no explanation provided.
Creators invest real time and effort into these campaigns. We research, write, revise, and publish content that helps projects gain visibility and credibility. This is not casual work. It is contribution.
When rankings are altered without communication, it sends a message that creator effort is disposable. Over time, this discourages honest participation and rewards uncertainty instead of quality.
This article is not written to accuse individuals or attack the platform. It is written to highlight a structural problem. A creator ecosystem cannot function properly without transparency, consistent standards, and basic communication.
The solution is simple.
If a rule was violated, explain it.
If a system recalculation occurred, communicate it.
If an error was made, correct it.
Binance CreatorPad has the opportunity to strengthen trust by addressing cases like this directly and fairly. Restoring rightful rankings where mistakes occurred, or clearly explaining decisions where they did not, would go a long way toward reinforcing confidence in the platform.
Creators are not asking for special treatment.
We are asking for clarity, fairness, and accountability.Those are not optional features of a healthy system.They are the foundation of it.
@Karin Veri @Daniel Zou (DZ) 🔶 @Richard Teng
ရှင်းလင်းချက်- ပြင်ပအဖွဲ့အစည်း၏ ထင်မြင်ယူဆချက်များ ပါဝင်သည်။ ဘဏ္ဍာရေးဆိုင်ရာ အကြံပေးခြင်း မဟုတ်ပါ။ စပွန်ဆာပေးထားသော အကြောင်းအရာများ ပါဝင်နိုင်ပါသည်။ See T&Cs.