tl;dr
**MEXC’s Unprecedented Demand Sparks Outcry in Crypto Community**
In a move that has sent shockwaves through the crypto world, a high-profile trader known as “White Whale” has accused MEXC, one of the largest cryptocurrency exchanges, of freezing $3.1 million of their assets and demanding an in-p...
**MEXC’s Unprecedented Demand Sparks Outcry in Crypto Community**
In a move that has sent shockwaves through the crypto world, a high-profile trader known as “White Whale” has accused MEXC, one of the largest cryptocurrency exchanges, of freezing $3.1 million of their assets and demanding an in-person meeting in Malaysia to resolve the issue. The exchange’s unusual request—offering luxury accommodations and trading perks in exchange for a face-to-face meeting—has ignited fierce debate over transparency, security, and the power dynamics between exchanges and users.
**A “Risk Control” Justification, But No Clear Explanation**
The dispute began in July 2025, when MEXC froze White Whale’s account under the vague umbrella of “risk control” measures. Despite the trader having completed standard KYC procedures—including identity verification, phone number confirmation, and address proof—MEXC’s global head of customer service reportedly sent a message offering an “exclusive invitation” to travel to Malaysia for a meeting with leadership.
The trader, who holds over $100 million in on-chain assets, rejected the offer, citing safety concerns. “Why would someone with over $100M on-chain ever agree to fly to another country and enter the lion’s den of an organization he’s publicly protesting against?” they asked. Screenshots of the exchange’s message revealed promises of “luxury accommodations” and “potential trading perks,” a tactic critics have labeled as coercive.
**MEXC’s Silence and the #FreeTheWhiteWhale Movement**
MEXC’s response was as vague as its initial freeze. A spokesperson stated the exchange “strictly follows risk management policies” but provided no concrete evidence or explanation for the in-person meeting demand. The lack of clarity has fueled outrage, with traders rallying under the hashtag #FreeTheWhiteWhale on social media, demanding the release of frozen funds.
This isn’t the first time MEXC has drawn criticism. In April 2025, user Pablo Ruiz reported $2 million in USDT frozen without prior notice, with MEXC offering only a “year-long account review” as a resolution. Other users have shared similar stories, alleging arbitrary freezes tied to vague claims of “abnormal trading activities” and a lack of human support.
**A Pattern of Poor Practices**
The incidents paint a troubling picture of MEXC’s operations. Users describe a pattern of arbitrary asset freezes, minimal transparency, and automated responses that ignore their concerns. One trader noted that MEXC’s Terms of Service do not mention in-person KYC requirements, raising questions about the legitimacy of the exchange’s demands.
**Security Risks in the Crypto World**
The controversy also highlights a growing concern: the physical safety of high-net-worth crypto traders. With the rise in crypto-related kidnappings and targeted threats, the idea of traveling to a foreign country to resolve a dispute with an exchange is increasingly fraught. White Whale’s refusal to comply underscores the risks of centralized platforms demanding in-person interactions, especially when users hold significant assets.
**A Call for Industry-Wide Accountability**
As the crypto industry matures, exchanges must balance risk management with user rights. MEXC’s actions—whether intentional or a result of internal mismanagement—risk eroding trust in centralized platforms. The incident has sparked a broader conversation about the need for standardized, transparent procedures for account freezes, clearer communication, and safeguards against coercion.
For now, the White Whale’s funds remain frozen, and MEXC has offered no further explanation. But the fallout has already begun: traders are questioning the reliability of exchanges that prioritize control over clarity, and the industry is watching closely.
What happens next could set a precedent for how exchanges handle disputes—and whether users will continue to trust them with their assets.