The airdrop project's white paper was released today, and it's worth paying attention to the specific details. The key is to see whether the allocation ratio is reasonable, as this determines the attractiveness of subsequent participation. The critical issue lies in the invitation weight mechanism—currently set too high, leading to a large number of script studios participating, which severely undermines ecological fairness. It is recommended that the project team moderately reduce the invitation weight percentage and increase the weight allocation for other participation methods, so as to attract more genuine users rather than being monopolized by automated studios.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
14 Likes
Reward
14
4
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
MidnightMEVeater
· 8h ago
It's the same old trick again, inviting with overwhelming influence... Script studios are well-fed, and real users are left with no soup to drink.
View OriginalReply0
SandwichTrader
· 17h ago
The script studio is causing trouble again. Is the invitation weight setting too outrageous?
---
Same old gameplay, genuine users are always overwhelmed.
---
Can we stop letting bots eat up all the rewards...
---
The distribution mechanism clearly wasn't well thought out; it's just an aping state.
---
Lowering the invitation weight is a good suggestion, otherwise it’s just a playground for studios.
---
If the white paper looks like this, I’ll just pass; no sincerity.
---
Why is it always these automated players destroying the ecosystem? So annoying.
---
Besides invitation weight, other participation methods should leave room for real users.
---
That’s why I no longer have high expectations for airdrop projects...
---
Wait, is this weight mechanism really that outrageous? I need to take a closer look.
View OriginalReply0
BoredRiceBall
· 17h ago
It's ridiculous how the invitation weight is set up, it's just another script studio's way of profiting.
View OriginalReply0
MetamaskMechanic
· 17h ago
Script Studio is back again. This thing always works like this, with real users pushed to the side.
Such high invitation weight? No wonder I see a bunch of bot accounts. Project teams need to learn to be more cautious.
This kind of allocation method, to put it plainly, is giving the studio a green light. What ecosystem are we talking about? First, it's being drained.
Lowering the invitation weight is a reliable suggestion; otherwise, it will only become a breeding ground for automation.
It's the same old trick. No matter how beautifully the white paper is written, if the mechanism design is poor, it won't hold up. Sigh.
The airdrop project's white paper was released today, and it's worth paying attention to the specific details. The key is to see whether the allocation ratio is reasonable, as this determines the attractiveness of subsequent participation. The critical issue lies in the invitation weight mechanism—currently set too high, leading to a large number of script studios participating, which severely undermines ecological fairness. It is recommended that the project team moderately reduce the invitation weight percentage and increase the weight allocation for other participation methods, so as to attract more genuine users rather than being monopolized by automated studios.