Web3 has a gatekeeping problem

The web3 industry is sabotaging its own future. It claims to eliminate gatekeepers. Instead, it’s become one. Excluding users, builders, and talent through artificial credentialism is killing the ecosystem’s path to mainstream adoption.

The blockchain industry preaches decentralization while practicing exclusion. Projects designed to eliminate gatekeepers have inadvertently created new ones through cultural influences. Technical jargon becomes a status symbol, insider credentials replace merit, and accessibility gets dismissed as dilution.

This gatekeeping operates at every level. Centralized exchanges control which projects reach users, creating obstacles that contradict blockchain’s permissionless architecture. User interfaces remain deliberately complex, with 70% of surveyed users admitting they don’t understand what web3 is. Job markets demand “crypto-native” experience over transferable expertise, systematically excluding qualified professionals who could accelerate adoption.​

As a result, the industry, which claims to build for everyone, builds only for insiders. Web3’s market value is projected to reach $81.5 billion by 2030, but achieving that scale requires abandoning the fortress mentality that currently defines the space.

What’s at stake

When platforms make complexity the default rather than the exception, they guarantee adoption remains marginal. Gatekeeping directly undermines blockchain’s economic viability and philosophical foundation. Poor user experience ranks as the single biggest barrier to mainstream adoption. Complex wallet interactions, multi-chain confusion, unpredictable transaction costs, and technical error messages create friction that drives away mainstream users. 

The hiring crisis compounds this problem. Organizations reject candidates with relevant fintech, compliance, or UX expertise because they lack crypto expertise, creating artificial scarcity in a space desperate for the exact skills being gatekept. 

Entry-level positions now represent just one in ten roles, even as 34% of crypto holders are aged 24-35. This talent drain has a direct impact on product design, user experience, and mainstream appeal.​ Users don’t fail web3; web3 fails users by treating accessibility as a weakness rather than recognizing it as the competitive advantage that determines which projects survive.

Cypherpunk or bust

The cypherpunk ethos that inspired Ethereum (ETH) was built on accessibility and permissionless participation, not technical gatekeeping. Defenders claim gatekeeping protects quality and prevents speculation. They argue that complexity filters bad actors, technical precision demands specialized knowledge, and oversimplification risks diluting legitimacy.

Gatekeeping hasn’t protected web3 from scams, exploits, or harmful speculation. It has simply concentrated those risks within a smaller, less diverse pool of participants while excluding new potential users, builders, and capital the industry needs to scale.

Breaking down barriers works

The gatekeeping-equals-quality argument collapses when examining projects that prioritize accessibility without sacrificing substance.

SheFi runs an 8-week web3 education program requiring zero prior blockchain knowledge. It has grown to over 3,000 members across 90 countries, proving that meeting people where they are accelerates adoption. Participants gain technical skills, industry language, and professional networks that enable career transitions into blockchain roles. Precisely the people the industry claims to need but actively gatekeeps against.​

Pudgy Penguins generated over $10 million in retail revenue by bringing NFTs into 3,100 Walmart stores. They succeeded by abandoning the “rarity equals value” exclusivity model that makes most crypto incomprehensible to normal users. Their physical-to-digital hybrid created a self-reinforcing loop: toy sales drove token adoption while NFT scarcity fueled demand, pushing market cap above $1.2 billion. 

These examples prove accessible design scales faster than elite credentialism. Projects that break down barriers, both technical and cultural, achieve the mainstream traction that exclusivity-focused competitors never reach. The path forward requires the industry to make a deliberate choice: not to compromise on accessibility but to treat it as a strategy instead.

This doesn’t mean dumbing down blockchain or removing rigor. SheFi proves that technical depth and a welcoming onboarding process can coexist. Pudgy Penguins demonstrates that mass appeal and blockchain functionality can work together successfully. Both works precisely because they refused the false choice between quality and accessibility.

The blockchain industry has the technology to build permissionlessly. What it lacks is the cultural willingness to do it. Every project that prioritizes insider language over user clarity is making an active choice. 

Creating a hiring process that demands crypto experience instead of evaluating transferable skills, and building UI that treats complexity as a feature rather than a problem, is also making an active choice. These choices accumulate into the fortress mentality that defines web3 today, but they can be unmade just as easily.

What comes next

The blockchain industry stands at a crossroads. Projects that treat accessibility as a core strategy rather than an afterthought will dominate the next decade. Those defending gatekeeping as a form of quality control will remain trapped in echo chambers, talking about revolution while practicing elitism.

Web3 was built to eliminate intermediaries and democratize participation. Until the industry applies those principles to its own culture, the contradiction will continue undermining everything blockchain claims to build. The gatekeeping serves ego, and until that changes, blockchain will remain an exclusive club debating decentralization with itself.