MEXC vs The White Whale is a story of how a lone trader and the crypto community took on one of world's largest crypto exchanges.
Author: Sahil Thakur
MEXC and The White Whale. What began as a frozen $3.1 million account spiraled into a viral campaign, drawing in thousands of supporters, major industry voices, and intense scrutiny of MEXC’s internal practices.
This is the full story of how one trader sparked a movement, challenged an exchange, and forced a reckoning that could reshape how crypto platforms handle power, transparency, and user trust.
In late July 2025, MEXC, a major cryptocurrency exchange, froze about $3.1 million in funds. These funds belonged to a pseudonymous high-volume trader known as “The White Whale.” The exchange claimed he violated its terms of service. According to MEXC, he had placed two orders within the same second. Their risk control system flagged this as prohibited automated trading.
MEXC then told the trader that his assets would be forfeited. They accused him of using bots or engaging in illicit trading. However, The White Whale denied all wrongdoing. He said he had not used any illegal bots. He also stated that he had complied with all KYC and AML requirements, including identity verification.
Feeling wronged and receiving no prior warning, The White Whale took the issue public. He began posting on X (Twitter) and other platforms. His goal was to pressure MEXC into returning his funds. This public response marked the start of a high-profile conflict between a lone trader and one of the world’s largest crypto exchanges.
By August 2025, the situation had not improved. As a result, The White Whale escalated the conflict. He launched a $2 million social media campaign using the hashtag #FreeTheWhiteWhale. The campaign aimed to build public pressure on MEXC.
To boost support, he offered bounties and free NFTs to participants. He also pledged to donate a large portion of the campaign’s proceeds to charity. The White Whale continued to assert that he had broken no rules. He claimed his only “crime” was being too profitable.
He accused MEXC of targeting him on purpose. According to him, the exchange acted in retaliation. He believed his successful trades hurt MEXC’s market-making partners. On the other hand, MEXC denied these accusations. They insisted the asset freeze followed normal risk procedures and had nothing to do with the trader’s profitability.
MEXC’s Global Head of Customer Service, known as “Derrick,” made an unusual demand. He told the White Whale to travel to MEXC’s office in Malaysia to verify his identity in person. This was a condition for unfreezing the $3.1 million account. However, this requirement was not mentioned in any of MEXC’s published policies.
The White Whale refused. He cited serious concerns about personal safety; also pointed to the rise in crypto-related kidnappings targeting wealthy individuals. He emphasized that he had already completed all standard KYC steps remotely. Moreover, MEXC’s own terms of service did not mention any need for in-person meetings.
After he declined the trip, Derrick continued to press the issue. He suggested that the funds could only be released if the trader appeared in person. At first, he named Malaysia. Later, he proposed Hong Kong as an exception. The demand seemed strange and raised more questions. Many observers saw it as a delay tactic or even a threat to the trader’s security.
In response, the White Whale went public once again. He exposed the exchange’s unusual condition. His revelation sparked outrage and disbelief in the crypto community. He then raised his campaign budget to $2.5 million. He doubled down on efforts to pressure MEXC and called the request a “sinister” ploy to lure him abroad.
Throughout August and September, MEXC stayed mostly silent. They gave no clear reason for freezing the funds. They also did not justify the request for in-person verification. The standoff continued without resolution, pushing the conflict toward a broader public backlash.
The crypto community responded quickly and strongly in support of the White Whale. His campaign gained massive traction on social media. Over 20,000 people joined the #FreeTheWhiteWhale movement. Supporters minted NFTs, used the hashtag widely, and ramped up the pressure on MEXC.
They created memes, changed profile pictures, and tagged MEXC executives in posts. These actions caused a major public relations issue for the exchange. Soon, the controversy began trending on Twitter (X). MEXC’s reputation came under heavy scrutiny.
At the same time, more users started sharing similar experiences. They accused MEXC of freezing accounts other than White Whale or taking funds without proper explanation. One user, Pablo Ruiz, said the exchange froze his $2.08 million USDT in April 2025. He was told the case would remain “under review” for 365 days. That meant a full year without access to his money.
Others claimed that MEXC had reversed profitable trades in the past. They said the platform labeled their gains as “abnormal trading activities” and seized the funds. These new allegations suggested a troubling pattern. As a result, the public outcry intensified. Trust in MEXC continued to decline.
Well-known crypto figures also joined the conversation. In late October, on-chain investigator ZachXBT publicly spoke out on X. He supported the White Whale’s credibility and criticized MEXC’s lack of transparency. His comments amplified the dispute and drew wider attention.
As pressure built, it came from all directions. Small traders, major analysts, and crypto media called for accountability. Many users took action. MEXC’s daily Bitcoin withdrawals jumped around 30×—from about 40 to over 1,200—shortly after the news broke in mid-July. Withdrawals stayed high in the months that followed. Users feared their own funds might be frozen next.
Meanwhile, MEXC’s token, MX, began to drop. It lost about 3 to 4% of its value amid the backlash. On Reddit and other forums, many warned others to avoid the platform. People saw the White Whale case as a warning. One user wrote, “It’s great that the White Whale finally got paid, but it doesn’t change the fact that MEXC froze a legit user’s funds for months – most regular users wouldn’t stand a chance if the internet hadn’t gotten involved.”
This wave of public pressure forced MEXC to take the issue seriously. The exchange now faced a possible mass exit of users unless it addressed the situation.
Much of the public conflict centered on Cecilia Hsueh, MEXC’s Chief Strategy Officer. She became the face of the company’s response during the controversy. Hsueh joined MEXC in late August 2025, right in the middle of the unfolding dispute. From the start, her exchanges with the White Whale were tense.
The White Whale accused MEXC’s team—implicitly including Hsueh—of making defamatory claims. He said they tried to justify the freeze by suggesting he was involved in criminal activity. At first, MEXC pointed to vague anti-money laundering (AML) concerns. But after those claims were debunked, the company shifted to calling him a “scammer.” These public accusations enraged the trader. He strongly denied them and presented evidence to prove his funds were legitimate.
The tone between both sides remained hostile. Hsueh later admitted she handled the situation poorly. “I messed up in communicating with him. I got emotional, and I shouldn’t have,” she said. Her acknowledgment showed that even MEXC’s leadership recognized errors in how the case was managed.
Meanwhile, behind the scenes, Hsueh was trying to resolve the dispute. She said the case was a wake-up call for MEXC. Internally, she had been pushing for a resolution since the day she joined. At the same time, she began engaging more openly with public criticism.
When one user commented that “100% this apology would never have happened if [White Whale] had only 100 followers,” Hsueh replied, “You’re not wrong. It takes a lot to wake up the whole company. We are working on making sure this doesn’t happen again.” Her blunt honesty revealed how much influence the trader’s public platform had on MEXC’s decision-making.
As the conflict moved toward resolution, the relationship between Hsueh and the White Whale began to shift. Tensions softened. Then, a disturbing incident occurred. Online trolls circulated a fake explicit video and claimed it showed Hsueh. The White Whale stepped in. He publicly defended her and denounced the smear campaign. He confirmed that the video was fake and urged people to focus on facts. “Inventing sexual rumors to tear a woman down is pathetic… I understand the rage, but the truth still matters,” he wrote.
That moment marked a turning point. Despite months of conflict, both parties showed mutual respect. Their shared defense of truth and integrity brought a rare sense of closure to an otherwise bitter dispute.
After three tense months, the conflict reached a public resolution at the end of October 2025. On October 31, Cecilia Hsueh posted a direct apology on X (Twitter). She admitted that MEXC had made serious mistakes in the case. “We fucked up. We apologize to The White Whale, and his money is already released. He can claim it at any time,” she wrote. She confirmed that the trader’s $3.15 million in assets had been unfrozen.
Hsueh also acknowledged that she mishandled communications. Her statement marked a major shift from MEXC’s earlier denials. The reversal came after months of growing public pressure. As Hsueh put it, the “internet got loud enough” to force change.
In the same post, she announced that MEXC would introduce reforms. These included a new “fast-track channel” for dispute resolution. The goal was to ensure faster and more transparent handling of similar cases in the future.
The White Whale replied to the apology just hours later. He said he was relieved that his funds had been returned. However, he pointed out that the apology was vague. In his response on X, he thanked his supporters. He also noted, “I did see the public apology and, while appreciated, it didn’t specify what they were apologizing for.”
He emphasized that MEXC never took back its earlier claims that painted him as a criminal or scammer. Those insinuations had seriously damaged his reputation. Still, he admitted the public effort had worked. “We did it – public outcry forces MEXC to do the right thing,” he wrote. He confessed that he had not expected MEXC to back down.
By early November, he had full access to his account again. The dispute was effectively resolved. The apology and fund release drew mixed reactions. Some praised the outcome. Others criticized the delay and noted that it took a massive public campaign to fix a clear wrong. MEXC’s leadership admitted that rebuilding trust would require real change, not just public statements.
The MEXC – White Whale case didn’t end with the fund release. Instead, it triggered a wave of follow-up actions by both the trader and the exchange. True to his word, The White Whale chose not to keep any of the recovered $3 million. He pledged to distribute the full amount to supporters and charity. His plan was to divide the money among the 20,000 people who supported the #FreeTheWhiteWhale campaign and select nonprofit groups.
This move showed that the campaign was never about personal gain. It was about principle and standing up for the community. He also said his work wasn’t done. He began collecting stories from hundreds of other users who reported similar freezes. His goal was to advocate for those without the reach or resources to fight back alone.
Meanwhile, MEXC started efforts to rebuild trust. Hsueh and the leadership team committed to reviewing internal systems. They focused on fixing problems in customer support and risk control. As promised, they began building a fast-track channel for resolving user disputes. Hsueh admitted that MEXC’s rapid growth had outpaced its internal systems. Risk, compliance, and communications teams had failed to keep up. Now, they aimed to close that gap.
MEXC also promised more transparency and user-first policies. These were rare admissions for a large crypto exchange. The White Whale case had clearly made a strong impact.
In an unexpected twist, the former adversaries found common ground. After the case was resolved, The White Whale and Hsueh held a private video call. They spoke for about an hour. Following the call, the trader offered to help MEXC as an unpaid advisor. He said he would lend his expertise to support reforms. His goal was to help MEXC become more transparent and user-centric.
Hsueh publicly accepted the offer. She confirmed that the company was committed to building a “new MEXC.” The development was surprising, given how bitter the dispute had been. Yet both sides seemed to realize that collaboration could lead to lasting improvements.
The White Whale said a better-behaved MEXC would benefit the whole crypto space. Hsueh agreed. She admitted that trust could not be rebuilt overnight. However, she believed they were on the right path.
The wider crypto community cautiously welcomed the outcome. The White Whale’s campaign became a powerful case study. It showed how public pressure can force a major exchange to take responsibility. His choice to share the recovered funds and help others earned deep respect across the space.
MEXC, however, still faces a major test. People are watching to see if its promises lead to real reform. Many want to see faster resolutions, fewer secretive freezes, and better customer communication. If MEXC follows through, the case could change how exchanges treat their users. If not, public skepticism will persist.
For now, the story of the White Whale vs. MEXC remains one of the most dramatic events in crypto history. It showed that even one trader, with enough community support, could challenge a powerful exchange. More importantly, it proved that transparency and accountability are no longer optional in the crypto world. They are demanded.
20 Airdrops That Could Print On Solana
Kaspa Roadmap 2026-2027: Every Upgrade, and What It Means
What Sam Bankman-Fried Investments Are Actually Worth Now
How Blockchains Freeze Tokens: The Arbitrum KelpDAO Case And Beyond
20 Airdrops That Could Print On Solana
Kaspa Roadmap 2026-2027: Every Upgrade, and What It Means
What Sam Bankman-Fried Investments Are Actually Worth Now
How Blockchains Freeze Tokens: The Arbitrum KelpDAO Case And Beyond
