Over the past couple of days, I’ve gone back to look at the pool data of a certain chain game. To put it plainly, what’s dragging it down isn’t “nobody playing,” but inflation plus an overly generous output design: early on, token issuance is used to build up hype; later, the emissions chase human nature, leaving everyone with only “mining, then picking up and selling.” As the pool gets strained and the token price softens, sustaining returns depends even more on increasing the distribution—then the more you keep filling, the emptier it gets… What I regret isn’t the final outcome; it’s that when I saw the inflation curve was off, I still stubbornly told myself to “wait and observe for two more days.”

Anyway, now I trust the process more: first, check the issuance cap, the token recovery (recycling) mechanism, and whether there’s governance that can stop it in time; otherwise, even the most impressive daily active users are just bubbles.

By the way, the community has recently been arguing a lot about the privacy coin/mixing ecosystem and the boundaries of compliance—and it’s actually pretty similar to this chain-game setup: once incentives and constraints aren’t explained clearly, the end result is tearing and trampling.