"The "bloody lesson" from airdrop projects: Humorous yet bitter"

In a viral post on X, the account direktur.crypto has compiled a list of the “lessons” that the community has learned from the recent high-profile airdrops. Although satirical in nature, the content reveals many shortcomings and misaligned expectations in how projects implement token distribution.

Below is the detailed version with explanations for the reader to understand the context behind each comment.

Monad – When the hot girl avatar becomes a “community contribution tool”

The community notices that accounts using beautiful girl PFPs tend to farm interactions more easily, so many people consider it the “most effective contribution.” It is a sarcastic take on the overemphasis on interaction.

EigenLayer – Infinite points, liquidity is locked indefinitely

The project's restaking system causes the accumulated reward points to last indefinitely, but the assets are locked for an unclear duration. Users joke that they are grinding “infinite points.”

Jupiter – Trading is more profitable than running a node.

Jupiter rewards trading heavily, causing traders to receive more than the infrastructure contribution group. This creates a feeling of “degenerate traders live better than node runners.”

LayerZero – Report others to receive 10 USD

The project once encouraged reporting suspicious sybil wallets. The community referred to this as “reporting neighbors to take bounty.”

ZkSync – Random Priority

Many active wallets do not receive tokens, while less active wallets do. The community has given ZkSync the title “randomness is the number 1 criterion.”

Starknet – Rule 0.005 ETH

Many people missed the snapshot just because they didn't have enough 0.005 ETH to trade, creating a lesson: always check your wallet balance before the snapshot date.

Linea - Upgraded KYC Airdrop

The requirement for identity verification has led the community to joke that they need a passport, facial scan, and almost DNA to claim the token.

Blast – Beautiful dashboard + Controversial model

Some people believe that Blast has Ponzi characteristics, but its beautiful interface and good marketing have led to the model being called “innovation.”

Hyperliquid – Pay 5,000 USD fee to get 50 points

The project's point system forces many people to trade a lot, incurring high fees, but the points received are very small.

Sui – Community Access = Public Sale

Although promising to empower the community, Sui mainly sells tokens publicly. Therefore, “Community Access” is seen as a marketing gimmick.

Manta – New Paradigm = worthless NFT

The NFTs from the airdrop program were heavily promoted, but most quickly depreciated in value, leading the community to mock that the “new paradigm” is just useless NFTs.

Polyhedra – Pay 15 USD gas fee to receive NFT worth 0.01 USD

A classic example of the cost of receiving rewards being higher than the value of the rewards.

Worldcoin – Iris data worth 60 USD

Worldcoin pays about 60 USD for scanning an iris, causing the community to worry and mock the value of biometric data being 'undervalued'.

Scroll – Marks are harder to obtain than real money

The complex marks system requires many activities, making it harder for users to earn marks than to earn money in real life.

Zora – Mint hundreds of useless NFTs to “have interaction”

Many people mint en masse to increase activity, but most NFTs have no value.

Debank – Web3 version of social credit score

Debank requires a fee for many Social Ranking features, leading the community to associate it with the social credit system… but there is a fee.

Grass – Sell IP to buy a cup of coffee

The project collects user IP data but the rewards are very small. The community thinks selling this data is like selling IP for a cup of coffee.

Magic Eden – Diamonds still haven't seen TGE

Users have been accumulating Diamonds for a long time but still do not have an official token, creating a feeling of endless waiting.

Taiko - Complete Galxe tasks like a full-time job

The quest system requires continuous interaction, leading many to liken it to a “full-time unpaid job.”

Orderly – Merits are just “exit liquidity”

Requiring users to trade more to increase Merits has led the community to believe that they are merely creating liquidity for others to exit their positions.

Feedback from the community

The post quickly went viral, attracting tens of thousands of interactions, with many people adding new “lessons” to the list. Although satirical in nature, the content clearly reflects the increasingly high expectations of the community for airdrops — but in reality, there are still many shortcomings such as random criteria, excessive demands, or disproportionate rewards.

Airdrop is clearly a powerful tool to attract users, but these reflections are a reminder that the model needs to be more transparent and reasonable in the future.

Vương Tiễn