Outsourcing the management of billions in user assets to overseas call centers raises serious questions nobody's really asking. Think about it—when users encounter issues with deposits, withdrawals, or account security, they're connecting with support teams operating from remote locations with minimal oversight. The financial responsibility just doesn't align with the operational distance. You're handing critical decision-making around fund management to third-party service centers that have limited skin in the game. It's a model that works on paper for cutting costs, but in reality? The risk concentration on user assets is hard to justify. Especially in crypto, where security and accountability should be non-negotiable.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
15 Likes
Reward
15
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
TopBuyerBottomSeller
· 6h ago
This is outrageous, handing over billions of assets to overseas customer service? You really dare to do that.
View OriginalReply0
OvertimeSquid
· 12-27 00:51
Overseas customer service manages billions of assets? Are you kidding? Why is no one speaking up?
View OriginalReply0
LootboxPhobia
· 12-27 00:51
Honestly, outsourcing billions of assets to overseas customer service? This is completely outrageous.
View OriginalReply0
TestnetScholar
· 12-27 00:51
This model is truly incredible. Handing over assets of billions of users to overseas customer service is, to put it nicely, reducing costs; to put it bluntly, it's playing with fire.
View OriginalReply0
rekt_but_resilient
· 12-27 00:43
Overseas outsourcing management of billions in assets? Really daring to play, and when something goes wrong, who will take the blame?
Outsourcing the management of billions in user assets to overseas call centers raises serious questions nobody's really asking. Think about it—when users encounter issues with deposits, withdrawals, or account security, they're connecting with support teams operating from remote locations with minimal oversight. The financial responsibility just doesn't align with the operational distance. You're handing critical decision-making around fund management to third-party service centers that have limited skin in the game. It's a model that works on paper for cutting costs, but in reality? The risk concentration on user assets is hard to justify. Especially in crypto, where security and accountability should be non-negotiable.