As negative reactions continue to appear on social media posts related to XRP, the possibility of opinion manipulation has been raised. No specific evidence supporting this has been presented yet.

The Crypto Basic, a blockchain outlet, reported on Nov. 10 that Tony Edward (토니 에드워드), founder of the Thinking Crypto Podcast, said most of his XRP-related posts receive negative comments.

Edward described it as a "large-scale fear campaign." He raised the possibility of organised involvement, citing the volume of comments, their timing and repeated similar content.

He specifically mentioned the possibility that artificial intelligence bots or spam accounts may have been involved. He also cited the possibility that supporters of competing blockchains or traders betting on an XRP decline may be involved. He added that he could not identify who was actually behind it.

Analyst CryptolawUS (크립토로우US) said he had seen a similar pattern. He claimed that accounts with few followers repeatedly appear in XRP-related disputes and that some accounts appear to be bots. He also criticised claims that XRP holders hold investment contracts related to Ripple as nonsensical, calling them an attempt to stir anger around XRP.

The issue was also addressed in the lawsuit between the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and Ripple. About 3,500 statements from XRP holders were submitted to the court as evidence at the time. An opinion submitted by Cryptolaw included cases involving investors, users and developers, with some shown to have acquired or used XRP regardless of Ripple. Judge Analisa Torres also mentioned that many buyers did not even know Ripple existed while reviewing cases of XRP purchases made through AI.

Earlier this month, criticism of David Schwartz (데이비드 슈워츠), Ripple's former chief technology officer, also surged. Schwartz has also complained that spam-like, unrelated cryptocurrency replies are mixed in with posts praising or criticising XRP.

CoinSocialBase's XRP sentiment monitoring tool pointed to repetitive negative sentiment, promotional posts and amplification patterns that appear bot-like. It added that such circumstances alone cannot prove organised involvement or an impact on market prices.

Not all of the increased negative sentiment can be seen as organised activity. As XRP prices remain weak, social sentiment plunged, and Santiment data confirmed that bearish views increased as the XRP price neared the $1 level.

What has been confirmed so far is that XRP discussions overall include many repetitive posts with low information density. But claims that a specific group is using bots to spread negative sentiment, or that supporters of competing projects or leveraged short sellers intervened, have not been proven.

The controversy shows that, as XRP price weakness overlaps with social media noise, it has become more important to distinguish between genuine investor dissatisfaction and automated amplification. The key is not the existence of negative sentiment, but how far its actors and influence can be verified.

Yes. A lot of low-follower accounts very engaged in most of it, as well as obvious bots. The arguments are also legally nonsensical, to attempt to stir up anger around XRP being some kind of investment contract in @ripple. These FUD accounts seem to forget #XRPholders mobilized to FIGHT that accusation and filed thousands of sworn affidavits saying XRP is NOT an investment contract in Ripple.