This is one of the reasons I generally stopped paying attention to the cryptocurrency world.

The number of voices with an accurate understanding is far outweighed by the number of people with some kind of personal and ideological axe to grind about (insert some combination of one or more of: government/regulation/inflation/economics/etc) and from my perspective the whole scene got increasingly wild.

George Selgin sometimes writes on cryptocurrencies. He knows what he's doing.

Though I mostly read him for his writings on eg the private mints that solved the British small change shortage during the industrial revolution. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3392302-good-money

I wonder if this could be done intentionally. It's cheaper to make a view popular with a niche, disliked group than to make the opposite view popular with a large voting bloc

I wouldn't say intentionally, there is solidarity around frustration with domestic and global banking systems, but they've just evolved from a limited view within the community.