The Dilemma and Solutions of the Web3 Airdrop Ecosystem

Recently, the airdrop strategy in the cryptocurrency field has shifted from being highly sought after to being controversial, reflecting the increasingly intensifying contradictions between project parties and users. From the incidents of a certain blockchain project to the controversies surrounding other Layer 2 projects, we can glimpse the issues present in the current airdrop ecosystem, such as distribution imbalance, the collapse of user trust, and the survival difficulties of "毛党".

1. Controversy Arising from Imbalanced Allocation Mechanism

The airdrop allocation of a certain blockchain project has sparked widespread discussion. The project allocated 15.8% of its tokens for airdrops, but testnet users only received 1.65%, while NFT holders accounted for 6.9%. Among them, 6 large holders gained substantial profits through rare NFTs, with the highest single address profit reaching $55.77 million. Similar situations have also occurred in other Layer 2 projects, where a few addresses received disproportionately high rewards.

This distribution method exposes two main issues:

1. Resources are overly tilted towards capital, and active ordinary users instead become "low-income households".
2. The lack of transparency in the rules has led to controversies such as "mouse warehouses."

Some projects have shifted to a distribution model centered on "fund retention time" and "risk asset allocation" as core indicators. Although this has suppressed witch attacks to some extent, it has also exacerbated the incentive failure for ordinary users, creating a vicious cycle where "the higher the capital threshold, the more substantial the returns."

2. The User Trust Crisis Intensifies

The user's unmet expectations for the Airdrop led to a series of chain reactions:

1. Yield inversion: Users of certain projects' test nets invest significant resources but receive meager returns, and even face restrictions such as forced lock-up.
2. Selling frenzy spreads: Several projects experienced large-scale sell-offs after the Airdrop, leading to a sharp decline in mainnet activity.
3. Double standards in rules: Some projects adopt differentiated treatment for different user groups, raising doubts about fairness.
4. Technological idealism is frustrated: Even innovative economic models, if they ignore fairness, will find it difficult to gain user acceptance.

The excessive enforcement of anti-witch measures has also led to some negative effects, such as mistakenly banning real user accounts and the contradiction between privacy protection and identity verification.

3. The Survival Dilemma of the Hair-Pulling Party

With the evolution of airdrop rules, traditional low-cost high-frequency interaction strategies are no longer effective. The new airdrop mechanisms require higher capital investment and longer participation time, making it difficult for ordinary users to obtain substantial returns. At the same time, the weight of interaction behavior in airdrop distribution has decreased, further squeezing the profit space for small capital users.

4. Reconstructing Fairness Consensus

To break the current deadlock, it is necessary to establish a more scientific and reasonable Airdrop mechanism:

1. Focus on the quality of user contributions rather than simply pursuing quantity.
2. Design a sustainable reward mechanism to encourage long-term participation.
3. Use blockchain technology to ensure the transparency of the distribution process.

Specific measures may include:

• Publicly disclose the Airdrop algorithm and accept third-party audits.
• Introduce community governance to allow users to participate in rule-making.
• Use gradient distribution to balance the interests of large and small users.
• Combine airdrops with long-term value creation.
• Utilize new technologies such as zero-knowledge proofs to verify identity while protecting privacy.

Conclusion

The reform of the airdrop mechanism requires the joint efforts of project parties, users, and the entire ecosystem. Only by returning to the essence of "contributor first" and establishing a transparent and fair distribution mechanism can we reshape the trust foundation of the Web3 ecosystem and achieve a virtuous cycle between value creators and value sharers. This is not only a practice of the spirit of decentralization but also key to promoting the healthy development of the entire industry.