《Humanity: The Founder Who Loses Control and Starts Cursing When Questioned, the Truth Behind the Community's Retribution》

The founder of the Humanity project, Terence Kwok, has predictably lost his cool, publicly launching personal attacks in response to a tweet from AB. It's hard to believe that this is a CEO claiming a valuation of $1 billion.

Ironically, while community users are crying out in pain from being reaped, Kwok feels 'wronged.' However, if you understand the tactics this project has employed throughout its journey, you'll realize that people only become enraged when they are exposed; this reaction is entirely reasonable. Next, let's outline the situation:

_________

1. Top Contributors Turned into Beggars: The So-Called 'Community Co-Building' is Just a Carefully Designed PUA Scenario

After announcing the completion of a $30 million funding round and a valuation of $1 billion, Humanity proudly launched the 'Fairdrop' airdrop, claiming to uphold community co-building and autonomy. The token economics clearly stated that 12% of tokens would be allocated to the community.

But when the airdrop was actually distributed, the reality of the harvest was revealed:

1⃣ After working hard for a year on sign-in tasks, the airdrop was worth 1u, which is already considered good; many received various '0 airdrops' due to lack of qualifications.

2⃣ Official mods who diligently maintained the community and created content were dismissed with '0 airdrops.'

3⃣ Meanwhile, multiple ghost addresses appeared on-chain, receiving up to 40,000 $H tokens with no interactions or contribution records.

Clearly, this cannot be explained by 'technical errors'; it only indicates that:

1⃣ The project probably never intended to fulfill the 12% community allocation promise; the so-called co-building was just empty rhetoric.

2⃣ Ghost addresses are the real 'preordained winners,' while users who genuinely contribute are merely sacrificed as cheap beggars.

3⃣ The initially claimed Fairdrop was nothing more than a PUA strategy slogan.

However, mistreating the community is not a first. Let's turn our gaze back to Terence Kwok's historical resume.

_________

2. Burning $200 Million in Startup Failure, A New Narrative to Make a Comeback?

This isn't Terence Kwok's first 'unicorn' project.

Related media report: https://t.co/Yig5NPvAqS

In summary, the reasons for failure are unremarkable, but in response to a series of catastrophic failures, Kwok's reaction is surprising; he stated, 'At most, I'll go back to school; failing in business is just like getting an MBA.'

These words reveal his true mindset: fundraising is like a scholarship, the entrepreneurial game is a testing ground, and investor money is merely 'tuition.'

This time, he changed lanes, donned the Web3 cloak, and returned with an old script. The $200 million disaster is now being replicated on Humanity, but this time, the 'investors' are the time, data, and trust of thousands of ordinary Web3 retail investors.

_________

3. Witch Screening Becomes a Farce, PUA User Contributions, Huge Privacy Data Risks

Humanity claims to employ a 'zero-knowledge + palm print recognition' dual insurance mechanism to defend against witch attacks; what has actually happened? According to community feedback:

1⃣ The actual technology is a patchwork of inferior products from a Shenzhen access control company;

2⃣ A single person can repeatedly verify multiple accounts, with a script pass rate of 99%! The so-called 'anti-witch' measure is completely ineffective;

In addition, over the past year, Humanity frequently conducted 'limited-time form filling' activities under the pretext of 'anti-witch'; in reality, these forms are just tools for the project to maintain a false sense of prosperity, while airdrop distribution does not reference these records at all.

Even more concerning is that Humanity explicitly benchmarks against Worldcoin, yet its risk control regarding privacy supervision is almost in a 'naked running' state.

Worldcoin has been investigated by multiple governments due to privacy risks; the domestic palm print technology used by Humanity is not only substandard, but its data storage and transmission paths have yet to be disclosed for compliance.

From treating the community as non-entities to using 'co-building' as a shield, and then being disposable, lying and engaging in PUA tactics, Humanity has thoroughly trampled on the trust mechanism of Web3.

The so-called palm print system does not recognize real humans but identifies those who are 'willing to give freely.'

In the face of facts and community voices, if Humanity does not want to become a rat crossing the street, it should publicly and rationally respond to community doubts instead of resorting to cursing and personal attacks.

Lacking both quality and accountability.