#空投激励机制 I’ve been analyzing the Lighter airdrop design for a while, and I finally understand why they did it this way. 50% of the tokens go to the community, 25% are airdropped in the first round without lock-up, and there’s a buyback mechanism—on the surface, it seems generous, but the details are the real killer.

The key is the logic behind this "airdrop incentive mechanism." No lock-up sounds great, but combined with the later setup that transactions can only be made on the Lighter platform and cannot be withdrawn to CEX, it essentially means controlling all liquidity in their hands. Large holders with high points can participate in one-on-one calls, get more tokens, and have greater say, but what about small retail investors? They face the same no-lock-up condition but lack platform advantages. Who bears the risk if they dump the price?

I’ve seen too many projects use "community-friendly" rhetoric to justify incentives, only to turn into tools for whales to harvest retail investors. The buyback mechanism of Lighter sounds good, but the specific amount hasn’t been decided yet, which raises suspicion—waiting until after TGE when the price drops, then telling you "the buyback plan has been adjusted." I’ve seen this trick too many times.

What’s most concerning is the phrase "manual high-frequency trading doesn’t count as a witch." This gives big players a legitimate reason to operate multiple accounts openly. How can small retail investors compete? The final outcome is often: community rhetoric, institutional profits.

It’s not that the Lighter project is bad, but be cautious of any incentive mechanism that claims to be "community-first." Before participating, ask yourself: Is this airdrop structure really beneficial to me, or am I just helping others lift their platform?