19 Comments

I personally don’t trust this point system stuff, nor can I be arsed to connect to this, test that, move that there etc etc etc…..I’ll wait for release, wait for the ‘point holder’ dump and buy in ‘if’ the project is viable and has good engagement. I don’t need to jump through hoops to get access to a 500 buck ‘potential’ airdrop - ain’t nobody got time for that !

Expand full comment

Or, buy Bitcoin, HODL, and go live your life.

Expand full comment

seems to me points may be okay (and have the virtuous properties you ascribe to them) if used strictly as a bridge to token distribution

the problem however is that people (whether as part of regulatory psyops or otherwise) are trying to make them their own thing with independent utility that would outlast a token distribution based on points

in practice, therefore, rather than, as you say, aligning users *better*, they will exacerbate the divisions b/w VCs/teams on the one hand and users on the other:

-->teams know the rules for accruing points and can change them, and use them to stealthily increase team/investor allo (classic info asymmetries)

-->teams/VCs will still get equity in the company as well

-->teams/VCs will be allocating value utility across tokens, points and equity, and thus incentive alignment will worsen, not improve--much the same as splitting value/utility between shares of stock held by VCs and tokens (held/bought by users, dumped by VCs) did

-->we will move from the notorious VC equity/token double dip to a notorious VC equity/token/points triple-dip, with users always having less information and only able to acquire the lower-quality asset

-->points are centralized, highly trustful and freely revocable (web2, not web3), and there is nothing they do that could not be done with non-transferable tokens that can later be made transferable, except non-transferable tokens are less appealing to teams because the teams lose some power/control

Expand full comment

Let's go one step further: why not make these points liquid and create a marketplace where they can be traded? May as well enable airdrop farmers to cash in early instead of dumping all at the same time when the project airdrops...

Expand full comment

The SEC isn’t fooled by adding one layer of abstraction. “Points” are an investment contract, even if there’s a little song and dance between them and the company accreting value to its shareholders. What am I missing here?

Expand full comment

Thx Arthur

Expand full comment

Insightful. Thanks for the time you put into this.

Expand full comment

Why is it not more likes airmiles and less like an IPO?

Expand full comment

Participation = Ownership is debateable statement.

Does holding UNI give me part of ownership of the protocol? Smart contract, perhaps. But not part of Uniswap Labs, unfortunately.

It's more like Participation = Reward system, but ownership stage is not yet reached in DeFi.

Expand full comment
Feb 10·edited Feb 10

one of the ethos of crypto is transparency, and yet we're now aping into projects without transparency (about their token distribution). the irony continues...

Expand full comment

Thank King. One point I just wanna add that web3 start up need a initial fund to pay for operation. This fund comes from ecosystem L1 grant or selling NFT without promises about token or future, we have seen a lots of projects in solana success in this way. And 100% points system is the main way to distribute the token in this cycle.

Expand full comment

Your article provides an interesting overview, history and perspective about IPO, ICO and points. Thanks.

Expand full comment

Nice work... LFG crypto bro!

Expand full comment

Good read!

Expand full comment

XRP 🚨 needs some more attention. I see potential in it. Though I think like many others its a traders coin…

Expand full comment