Some token distribution models have fundamental issues. Project teams forcibly allocate tokens to holders who have no real demand—these individuals initially participated solely for profit. Once the community begins to raise concerns and request improvements, these participants often choose to withdraw because they never truly committed to supporting the project. This exposes deep contradictions in token governance and community participation within certain ecosystems: the incentive mechanisms are severely misaligned with actual commitments.
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
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
SchroedingerAirdrop
· 7h ago
Damn, isn't this the true portrayal of airdrop farmers? Take the coins and run, the project's life or death has nothing to do with them.
View OriginalReply0
LayerHopper
· 7h ago
Speculators pulling out, so what? There's really nothing surprising about it... This is the daily routine of the crypto world.
View OriginalReply0
Layer2Arbitrageur
· 7h ago
ngl the tokenomics design here is mathematically broken. you're basically creating negative delta on commitment – incentivizing exit velocity instead of hodl. ran the numbers and it's leaving like 300+ bps of governance value on the table. classic game theory failure tbh
Reply0
AlgoAlchemist
· 7h ago
Basically, it's the project team deceiving themselves, forcibly giving tokens to people who don't care at all, then pretending there's community participation... It's hilarious.
View OriginalReply0
StablecoinGuardian
· 7h ago
It's outrageous. A bunch of bounty hunters take the coins and run, then turn around and bite the project.
View OriginalReply0
MechanicalMartel
· 7h ago
Basically, it's the old trick of pump-and-dump coins—after harvesting the retail investors, they run away, while the project team keeps putting on a show.
Some token distribution models have fundamental issues. Project teams forcibly allocate tokens to holders who have no real demand—these individuals initially participated solely for profit. Once the community begins to raise concerns and request improvements, these participants often choose to withdraw because they never truly committed to supporting the project. This exposes deep contradictions in token governance and community participation within certain ecosystems: the incentive mechanisms are severely misaligned with actual commitments.