If the project party indeed cannot cover a large airdrop due to funding issues, then raising the threshold for the second stage to above 250 points may be a more reasonable solution. This way, only users who truly invest time and resources to achieve high scores can receive the rewards they deserve, which better reflects the original intention of the activity - to attract users who are genuinely willing to participate deeply, rather than just those driven by short-term interests.
Currently, I have maintained a score of over 260 for several consecutive days, and I have every reason to believe that if the threshold for the first stage is set above 260, the project party is capable of distributing moderate to large amounts of airdrops to these high-value users. Otherwise, if a low threshold is continued, with a first-come-first-served basis, it will only allow those who barely score 15 or 16 points daily to receive rewards similar to those who consistently score 18+ points daily, which is neither fair nor encourages sustained contributors.
A more ideal approach might be to set a three-stage mechanism:
First stage: 300 points (ensuring high-contribution users receive substantial rewards),
Second stage: 250 points (medium rewards, still with a limit on amounts),
Third stage: 200 points (basic participation rewards, first-come-first-served).
This not only distinguishes users with different levels of participation, but also avoids issues of point waste and reward dilution. Otherwise, studios and low-investment users will continue to occupy most of the resources, while those who truly work hard will not receive positive feedback - so who will be the ones left in the end from this activity?