I noticed a pattern starting from 2023 up to now—the Web3 airdrop landscape has completely changed. In the past, projects like Uniswap and Arbitrum truly provided value to early users. But now, the narrative has shifted.

I looked into the history of 12 major projects and saw how trust continues to be exploited. Starting with HOP Protocol, which introduced a witch-hunting mechanism where those who report get a share—like a reverse incentive system that encourages community infighting. Blast, even with Paradigm backing, locked users' ETH for points that didn’t yield worthwhile returns. The pattern is consistent: projects use activity metrics to collect data and fees, then suddenly change rules before the token launch.

LayerZero was really the turning point. After 18 months of cross-chain interaction, they suddenly required "active proof" to retain allocation, otherwise zeroed out. Many genuine users were wiped out. This was the moment the community’s perception shifted—realized there’s no guarantee, no protection.

zkSync, Infinex, Linea—all share this common pattern. The traits I see in project teams are: 1) ambition to collect massive TVL or volume, 2) flexibility in rules depending on what benefits them, 3) delayed transparency until TGE. Linea created endless tasks like a full-time job but with no decent compensation. Grass exploited user hardware for bandwidth—free extraction under the guise of Web3.

Monad promised an airdrop to 230,000 addresses but only 3.3% actually received distributions. Babylon tried to force Ethereum staking mechanics onto the Bitcoin network, resulting in massive gas fees for retail investors who hadn’t staked yet. Backpack’s "Volume = Points" campaign turned into a reverse pump scheme—one trader paid $300k in fees but received $150k in tokens.

EdgeX allocated $100 million to over 80 new addresses with no history, while genuine traders who spent millions on fees received sub-$1k airdrops. Genius, the last one, offered 70% token burn or a one-year lock-up—forcing users to choose between losing most of their airdrop or waiting indefinitely.

The common thread? Projects design systems that extract value from retail investors through activity, volume, and opportunity cost. "Anti-farming" mechanisms have become tools for selective distribution, not fairness. The bubble ended because the market saw there was no real product-market fit—everything was PUA and black box mechanics.

Now investors realize: the traffic chasing airdrop expectations is just a mirage. Real value comes from projects with actual utility and willingness to collaborate with the community. This is the end of the airdrop era and the beginning of Web3 with substance. Projects that emerged through manipulation will face user exodus, while genuinely valuable ones will build stronger trust from the ruins.