Dear CoinGecko

We would like to make a public record inquiry into a particular concern regarding the iEthereum data we view as a CoinGecko user.

Dear Gecko of the Coin,

We are publishing this open letter to bring attention to the iEthereum token you have listed. Additionally, we would like to make a public record inquiry into a particular concern regarding the iEthereum data we view as a CoinGecko user. We appreciate your time in this genuine formal introduction.

The iEthereum Advocacy Trust, a self organizing collective is on a mission to bring awareness to the iEthereum value via a variety of mediums. We look forward to working with CoinGecko project in a manner similar to other foundations in the future.

As a collective seeking to publish good information, clarity and focus on particular issues… it is our obligation to bring to you a concern we hope is a simple fix/oversight.

Under your iEthereum listings page, you have published a header stating

For the Record: At this time we only support the purchasing of and in favor of the original iEthereum code. We are advocates for the iEthereum original code on any EVM chain. We are not founders, not part of the team and have no direct affiliation to the project itself. Nor are we to know whats best for the future development. This is the beauty of open source; build as you may. However, as fans left to speculate, we could only hope that there would be an iEthereum ecosystem entirety filled with different smart contract iEthereums; Blue, Red, Green, Finance….serving separate functions such as gas, etc. In fact, this deserves a greater conversation at a later date, another article.

However, our matter of concern lies in clarity. Nobody knows the founder, the original code is open sourced and cannot be changed, it is fully immutable. There is respectively zero communication between the project and the public. The project has no visible team as development of token is completed.

With that said, were you instructed to post a redirection memo on the page? Is a redirecting header an oversight, mistake? How do you have the authority to redirect viewers of iEthereum on CoinGecko to a different contract?

Btw, this new contract has more supply with centralized control and admin keys. It is a completely different value proposition and in our current stance; an inferior product. The explorer data provides wallet and transaction evidence to support our current thesis as well. And to be fully transparent, there is also data to suggest the new iEthereum looks to be a fraud. The deployer address is Fake_Phishing6602. This is the address associated with the contract CoinGecko has published a redirection to on the top of the iEthereum listings page.

Is this a mistake or oversight? Do you have permission or authority to redirect website traffic to a unknowing token? If no permission, why would CoinGecko go to the trouble to create a header disclaimer? Please Advise! Please Resolve! Thank you!



iEthereum Advocacy Trust

iEther way, We see value!

If you see value in our weekly articles and the work that we are doing; please sign up for our free subscription and/or share this article on your social media.

Follow us on X (Twitter) @i_ethereum

If you are currently an iEthereum investor and you believe in the future of this open source software; please consider upgrading to a premium paid sponsorship. A $50 annual sponsorship is currently the greatest assurance your iEthereum investment has a voice in the greater crypto space.

Receive free iEthereum with a sponsorship.

Feel free to contact us at with any questions, concerns, ideas, news and tips regarding the iEthereum project.

Thank you

Note: We are not the founders. iEthereum is a 2017 MIT Open Source Licensed Project. We are simply talking about this project that nobody else is while it is publicly listed on several coin indexes.

Join the conversation

or to participate.