Recently, a major event occurred in the encryption circle - a well-established Wall Street bank clashed with Bitcoin holders.

The situation began like this: a bank released a research report mentioning that MSCI might adjust its rules to remove companies with digital assets accounting for more than 50% from the main index. If this happens, MicroStrategy will be the first to bear the brunt, and the market expects there will be a passive selling pressure of 2.8 billion dollars.

Once the news broke, the community reacted quite vigorously.

Investor Grant Cardone took direct action - withdrawing $20 million from that bank while also filing a lawsuit related to credit card operations. Another well-known figure in the industry, Max Keiser, even urged everyone to increase their holdings of MSTR and Bitcoin, to face it head-on.

Michael Saylor, the head of MicroStrategy, remains very calm, responding: "Index classifications do not define our company." The implication is that regardless of how outsiders view it, the company's Bitcoin strategy will not waver.

To be honest, this game is quite interesting. On one side is the traditional financial system trying to limit encryption assets with its own rules, while on the other side are steadfast Bitcoin believers expressing their stance through action. A potential selling pressure of $2.8 billion sounds scary, but some believe it is just a test of the community's true cohesion.

Ironically, some people have found that while these traditional institutions publicly question Bitcoin, they are secretly allocating digital assets themselves. This double standard has made many people even more unhappy.

How will this storm eventually end? Can the rules of traditional finance really constrain the development of decentralized assets? We may have to wait for the market to provide an answer.