I see many people discussing the situation of projects being exploited.
Everyone says they are lucky not to have exploited a certain project or to have cut losses in time regarding a certain project.
What I want to say is that the essence of airdrops is a risk-reward ratio issue, that is, the ratio of input to output.
Without discussing the gains, there are some projects that simply cannot be done in terms of input.
Because they have many flaws and negative information, so your input cost will be quite high, and you need to gamble against these risk points.
For example, the Sony chain Linea and Base, which I have also mentioned in the previous article.
At that time, it might have been written roughly, but in terms of results, I personally think it should be correct; even if an airdrop was issued then, it wouldn’t be large, because the timing was wrong and expectations were consumed completely.
So, in terms of input, which is choosing a project—putting it another way, investment research, we must do our homework in advance to prevent wasting our time later.
Let’s first talk about the Sony chain issue. I also replied to Alchemy Uncle, 'web2 back-end rollback chain'; at that time, the hype around dog tokens was not what the project side wanted, and they directly rolled back, which is the first way to kill it. Moreover, just like web2 games cannot survive, they come to web3 to launch chain games. Web2 big companies coming to web3 generally won’t have good results, because their ways of thinking are different; one must give up to gain, and they probably don’t understand this. Their support for web3 projects won’t be substantial.
As for Base, I still adhere to my previous viewpoint. Due to various risk factors and policy factors, it is unlikely to issue.
He may have some other airdrops, such as NT or some dog tokens, which have already released many dog token airdrops of this type, right? To reward those who play on his chain.
Linea seems more like an internal conflict, with many resignations, constantly conducting witch hunts, filtering out all the real people until only the 'mouse warehouse' remains. Actually, his best time to issue coins was when the SEC was not investigating.
Of course, I am just an ordinary person without any insider information.
So, it is more important to investigate a project before participating, rather than jumping in immediately.

What kind of projects should not be touched?
① Don't touch projects with negative information.
For example, founders with controversial backgrounds, making bad remarks, having launched trash projects, history of rug pulls, blockchain rollbacks, and data deletions—avoid them all.

② Strictly investigate witch hunts—don't touch.
It's not enough to just post a strict witch hunt tweet; the project may be trying to scare you.
KYC verification, IP verification, checking device numbers, checking VPNs, and witch hunts are all common.
If you feel cautious about two things, run away if you feel cautious about three.

③ Deposit-type projects.
Deposit-type projects are essential for big players; they have nothing to do with us. Popular big players are involved, while obscure ones are prone to scams.
Deposit-type projects + points system + frequent activities = scams.

④ Changing plans.
If a project keeps postponing its TGE, it means they lack confidence or have been unable to reach an agreement with exchanges; either way, it's uncomfortable.
Daily activities, today it's a Telegram event, tomorrow it's a Discord event, and the day after it's a Twitter event—this indicates that the project side lacks data.
Constantly changing tracks: today it’s a public chain, tomorrow it’s infrastructure, the day after it’s AI. They install all the vague concepts—In the digital age, a decentralized metaverse platform based on blockchain public chains, deeply integrated with AI, Depin, DeSci, and zero-knowledge proof (ZK) technology, combined with fully homomorphic encryption (FHE) technology, aims to build a seamless smart ecosystem connecting the real and virtual worlds, promoting global sharing and borderless innovation of digital assets, data privacy, and personalized services—run!!

⑤ Fake financing.
Financing of 78 million, with not a single well-known institution involved, they directly give up.

⑥ Policy risk type.
People are in China, the company is in the U.S., the project is in the park, airdrops can be claimed by U.S. residents—projects involving risks are like time bombs.

That's about it. Then there's the feeling, it’s like the feeling after seeing many popular projects, akin to market sentiment; I call it flu.

The flu of web2 spreads easily; I want to pass the flu of web3 to you.