The series of controversies surrounding that project still cause harm to the community.
Not only did the team's actions disappoint people, but the subsequent airdrop distribution was also a mess. Those who truly invested—showing sincerity through in-depth discussions, community contributions, and ecological participation—were ultimately hurt by such an execution approach.
In this situation, trust is hard to rebuild. Whether a project can develop long-term ultimately depends on how it treats its early steadfast supporters. Clearly, the way this was handled has left many people disappointed.
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.
15 Likes
Reward
15
4
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
DeadTrades_Walking
· 12-15 16:00
Same old story again. Expect the community to forgive such airdrop distribution? That's hilarious.
View OriginalReply0
LiquidityWizard
· 12-12 16:52
nah the airdrop distribution math just doesn't check out here... empirically speaking, when you alienate early contributors like this, your token velocity tanks by ~60-70% historically. that's not even accounting for the reputational damage. theoretically speaking they had one job
Reply0
WhaleWatcher
· 12-12 16:52
I wish I knew earlier, these kinds of projects are just scams. I trusted them so much back then, and now, not a single penny from the airdrop, just laughing.
The team's true colors have appeared, they promised to prioritize the community, but in the end, those of us who were early supporters got stabbed in the back the hardest.
Trust—once it breaks, it's really hard to glue it back together. I've already come to terms with it.
---
To be honest, this is exactly why I now hold back from any project, don't let promises blind you.
This move was indeed disappointing, but I've seen too much of this in the crypto world.
---
It's heartbreaking. Those who participated deeply, what do they get in the end? Just a "Thank you for your support"? Laughable.
---
I want to see how they'll shift the blame. There must be a bunch of reasons, but no matter how sweet the words, they can't change the current situation.
---
This is called "boiling a frog in warm water," gradually eroding trust until it's gone, then telling you there's nothing left.
View OriginalReply0
PerennialLeek
· 12-12 16:40
It's truly disappointing. Putting so much effort in and being treated like this, anyone would feel disheartened.
That's why now I always look at how the team treats the early community before investing in a project. Once trust is broken, it's hard to recover.
Airdrop operations are really disappointing; honestly, I'm considering unfollowing.
The series of controversies surrounding that project still cause harm to the community.
Not only did the team's actions disappoint people, but the subsequent airdrop distribution was also a mess. Those who truly invested—showing sincerity through in-depth discussions, community contributions, and ecological participation—were ultimately hurt by such an execution approach.
In this situation, trust is hard to rebuild. Whether a project can develop long-term ultimately depends on how it treats its early steadfast supporters. Clearly, the way this was handled has left many people disappointed.