The airdrop season has heated up again recently, and the task platform is fighting witches like it’s doing attendance checks. Every time the points refresh, I start to suspect that I’m the one working overtime… But the more it gets like this, the more I want to look into how “credibility” is actually evaluated. Don’t let newbies get fooled right away by GitHub’s green dot. Submitting a lot doesn’t mean it’s reliable. First, check whether it’s maintained long-term, whether the core changes have been reviewed back and forth by a few people, and when issues raise vulnerabilities or disputes, how the team responds—this is more useful than just “updating frequently.”

Also, don’t treat audit reports as a talisman. Focus on what the audit scope says, and whether there’s a disclaimer like “we didn’t review this part / the upgrade is out of scope.” Then check whether the high-risk issues have been fixed, and how they were fixed. And about upgrades involving multi-signature, to put it bluntly, it’s like “the keys to the home safe are held by a few people.” How many keys there are, who holds them, whether they can be replaced, and whether there’s a timelock (giving you time to react)—these matter more than slogans. In any case, whenever I see something that requires authorization or depositing funds now, I first scan these items so I can feel more at ease. Otherwise, before you know it, you end up turning into someone else’s employee.