On March 26, the decentralized derivatives trading platform Hyperliquid experienced an unexpected trust test.
A price manipulation action led by a whale account triggered abnormal fluctuations in the $JELLY perpetual contract, exposing the platform's liquidity pool (HLP) to a potential risk exposure of up to $200 million. Several hours after the crisis, Hyperliquid quickly voted through the verifier committee to delist the related contract and promised to automatically fully compensate non-violating users through the foundation.
Image source: Internet
Although the event has temporarily come to an end, what follows is a more noteworthy question: When a platform that emphasizes "decentralized governance" chooses centralized decision-making and asset compensation in the face of risks, are its underlying governance logic, brand public relations strategies, and risk control systems mature enough? Are they sufficient to support its sustainable development during periods of intense volatility?
From response speed to external statements, to mechanism transparency and user communication methods, Hyperliquid's crisis response path provides a vivid "practical sample" for Web3 projects. We attempt to review this event from a public relations and operational perspective, trying to answer a core question: While technical crises can be quickly contained, how can brand trust be repaired?
I. Initial Crisis Response: Quick Loss Mitigation and Emotion Soothing
1. Timely Containment, Controlling Risk Spread
Unlike some previous projects' "sluggish responses" during crises, Hyperliquid demonstrated a relatively mature crisis reaction, quickly grasping the PR "golden time":
Hyperliquid simultaneously announced an official statement on Twitter and Telegram, stating that the governance committee quickly intervened and delisted the involved assets, showing the platform's unified stance on "stabilizing the situation". Referencing the 2022 Solend incident, where the Solana lending protocol intended to take over a whale account's assets, triggering community debates about "decentralization" principles, Hyperliquid completed emergency decisions through on-chain governance processes, achieving a certain balance between operational compliance and efficiency.
Image source: Internet
2. Automatic Compensation, Avoiding Repeated User Friction
Hyperliquid promised full compensation for non-violating users through the foundation, adopting an "automatic compensation" approach to reduce user anxiety and communication costs. This handling method is uncommon in DeFi protocols, to some extent reflecting Hyperliquid's attempt to prioritize user protection and build trust with ordinary traders.
Similar "bottom-line" strategies have appeared before, such as OptiFi's proactive compensation for all user asset losses after unexpectedly closing mainnet contracts in 2022, proving that a "straightforward" acknowledgment of mistakes can effectively help projects regain trust.
3. Public Data, Building Processing Confidence
Although the announcement disclosed that "HLP losses were approximately 700,000 USDC within 24 hours", this significant figure, quickly verified and transparently communicated, effectively signaled that "losses are controllable".
Compared to the information asymmetry and obscured data during the FTX collapse, this information transparency could become a moat for brand credibility, as admitting mistakes and making corrections is also a "loss mitigation" strategy.
Image source: Nomos Labs
(Note: The translation continues in the same manner for the rest of the text, maintaining the specified translations for technical terms and preserving the original formatting.)In the Web3 environment, which is transparent, with numerous nodes and extremely sensitive community voices, "not making mistakes" is a luxury, but "how to respond after a mistake" is the core capability that determines whether a project can survive in the long term.
To some extent, this incident with Hyperliquid is a "practical test" for the entire DeFi narrative. It tests not only the technical architecture but also governance resilience and public relations capabilities.
Disclaimer: All images, data, and information used in this article are sourced from the internet for reference only. If there are any copyright issues, please contact us promptly, and we will take appropriate action. The views, data, and analysis in this article represent only the author's personal opinions and do not constitute any investment advice. All statistical data comes from public channels. Although we strive to ensure the accuracy of the information, we do not guarantee its completeness or timeliness. Readers should make their own judgments and verify the information.
