Grass airdrop caused dissatisfaction among the community
Recently, the well-known decentralized physical infrastructure network (DePin) project Grass (commonly known as Xiaocao) finally announced the airdrop query page, under the banner of "millions of people around the world take back collective control of the Internet", striving to gain popularity in one fell swoop .
However, when users checked the amount of their airdrop coins, there was a strong backlash because the number of airdrops was too small, and questions continued to arise. What happened?
The insufficient number of airdrops was ridiculed by the community
First, let’s look at Grass’s initial plan, with a total supply of 1 billion $GRASS tokens, 10% of which will be airdropped and distributed to participants of the closed alpha test, as well as active users from periods 1 to 7.
However, the distribution ratio of tokens has been significantly skewed. Many users said that they only received a small amount of tokens after spending several months supporting the project, while some users who only participated in the early alpha test and did not participate in the subsequent follow-up. A large number of token airdrops can be obtained.
A user named Elvhis complained on X (Twitter) that he had worked hard to accumulate more than 100,000 points, but in the end he only received 32 $GRASS tokens, which made him feel that he had been hastily dismissed.
Image source: XElvhis responded to Grass’ official tweet
However, Elvhis is lucky. After opening the airdrop application page, many users who participated in the entire process were surprised to find that they had only used one device to connect without opening additional accounts or committing any violations, but they were inexplicably connected. "Being a witch" got less than 32 tokens.
Not only did Grass officials not disclose the Witch standards and complete token distribution plan, but when faced with community issues, they also failed to provide adequate communication and explanation on social platforms such as X (Twitter), which also made Disappointment spread rapidly among the community, who believed that Grass was "pursuing decentralization in vain, but is pursuing centralized totalitarianism."
There is still "1 action" that can be saved by the witch
In view of too many users reporting that they were being used normally but were being witched, Dan, the head of the Asia Pacific region of Grass, released a "complaint form" so that users who were witched can lodge complaints about their situation. The team will investigate according to the contents of the form. , re-determine whether the user is eligible. Grass Witch Situation Complaint Form
However, in the absence of clear official standards, many users still angrily criticized Grass for disrespecting the community. The form was not published on the official X account, making users even more angry. They believed that even if they filled out the form, the official It won't be handled at all. In the end, it is very likely that it will just be said "it is certain that the user has violated the regulations" and it will be dismissed hastily.
Grass Airdrop Controversy: Communication and Fairness are the Key Points
From the Grass airdrop controversy, we can see that it is far from enough for a decentralized project to rely solely on concepts and technology. How to fairly reward participants and communicate timely and effectively when encountering problems is the key to the project. The key to whether you can go on for a long time.
If it wants to get rid of the current FUD predicament, Grass may need to listen more actively to users and show more transparency. Whether it is fair token distribution, good communication strategies, or the maintenance of community trust, these are all future projects key issues that must be paid attention to.
If the dissatisfaction of the community continues to accumulate, projects with potential may not be able to realize their original intentions and will eventually become a "weed" abandoned by the community.
