MoversSomeguy↓416Afi↓374aadvark↓2630xSammy↓253Mitsuo↓248Tradevitalik.eth↑43.1%Anton Boiarchuk↑9.6%Biti8↑3.2%Cuzzo 🛡️↓4.2%VouchesMLO990 WHUF → Serpin TaxtMLO496 WHUF → CirrusMLO100 WHUF → Phoenix 🐦‍🔥MLO100 WHUF → OSFReviewsJeetupositive · 68 upvotesjeff.hlpositive · 46 upvotesDegen Ape Traderpositive · 31 upvotesaikendrum.ethpositive · 18 upvotes
Profile· Known@nikitabierOn Ethos
Nikita Bier

Nikita Bier

31 reviews, 13% of them positive.13% positive · 31 reviews· Influence factor 319, above 62% of accounts

The record

From 31 activities · Apr 2026

Head of Product at X known for aggressive mass-banning of crypto accounts and perceived bot enforcement, often without clear evidence or meaningful appeal processes. Criticized for antagonistic communication style, micromanagement, and dismissive treatment of user feedback, though some acknowledge efforts to combat spam and engagement farming. Polarizing figure whose product decisions—including restrictions on crypto content and algorithmic changes—have alienated creators and real users while generating significant backlash over account suspensions and lack of transparency.

“neutral”I don't always agree with Nikita re: product updates (especially the local-content one, as it would basically kill creators targeting global audience and having minimal local engagement), but I feel like the negative reviews re: bans might be slightly biased and unjustified. I'm a crypto account and I'm active on crypto twitter. I called out Nikita a few times in the past - none of them were necessarily very civil. But when I had issues Nikita still reached out and helped solving them. And I'm not banned (yet 😹). But that's because I don't have the social media presence of a bot. Any time I've seen crypto accounts call out Nikita it usually were people who spend their days mass replying "GM" or spamming "plz follow back" without ever tweeting anything meaningful. Oftentimes they also mass engage in reposting and commenting under fake crypto giveaways. You might have seen Nikita dunking on accounts like that more than once. You might be human, but if you have the online presence of a bot - then you might get nuked. And imho that's deserved because you're not contributing anything and just making the platform worse for everyone. There have been CT bans that weren't justified and felt very targeted - nub comes to mind. But this isn't necessarily Nikita's fault; he is the head of product and not someone who handles account restrictions. The recent ban waves targeted bots and accounts with bot-like activity. If you got hit by the recent ban wave then you most likely were one of the accounts that got flagged due to bot-like activity. Paying for premium and being human verified on ethos doesn't change the fact that you have a social media presence of a bot. And it doesn't give you immunity - there's plenty of bots and scammers with a checkmark. They aren't immune to account restrictions either. This is my first neutral review. I chose to leave a neutral review precisely because I don't always agree with Nikita, but I also don't necessarily agree with accounts negatively reviewing him because they got nuked due to having the social media presence of a bot.Username McUserface ( ͠° ͟ʖ ͡°) · 1460· 6mo ago · neutral21
12 of 31 · most upvoted firstMore ›