Actually, I’m not surprised at all by the MAJOR distribution. I’ve always had my reservations about airdrop allocations, especially with Telegram mini apps. My skepticism grew after witnessing the aftermath of projects like Hamster Kombat, CATIZEN, X Empire, and NOTAI.
These platforms initially engaged their communities but ultimately left many users feeling abandoned, having farmed their efforts with little to no reward.
The increasing demand from Telegram apps for $TON, Telegram stars, and other transactions raises red flags. It feels more like a pre-sale than a genuine opportunity for users to earn rewards. Imagine investing your time and effort into mining and completing tasks—only to find that you still need to pay to receive your rewards.
Why not just be upfront and call it “pay to earn” instead of misleading the community with claims of “play to earn”?
When MAJOR announced a total token supply of 100 million, I was sceptical about the fairness of their distribution plan given the size of their community.
According to the MAJOR Telegram app, the criteria for the MAJOR airdrop included:
- Transactions in Stars and $TON
- Inviting friends
- Completing tasks and collecting achievements
- Participating in games
- Participating in or creating a squad
While these factors seem reasonable on the surface, they overlook significant considerations. Many accounts were suspended during this process, indicating that the allocation was not as equitable as it should have been.
It’s crucial to address an issue that has disappointed many in the community. It’s disheartening to see individuals dedicate months of their time, energy, and even money to support a project—believing in its potential—only to receive minimal or no airdrop rewards simply because they didn’t engage in specific transactions or referrals.
Not everyone has the financial resources to perform those transactions or the social network to bring in referrals. This approach creates an environment where only those with certain privileges benefit from the airdrop, sidelining loyal supporters who contributed in meaningful ways.
Airdrops should aim to reward everyone who participated—not just those who meet specific financial or referral criteria. By making these distinctions, projects risk alienating the very supporters who invested their trust and time into them. It’s disheartening to see genuine contributors feel undervalued because their efforts weren’t recognized in the same way as others.
I strongly urge the MAJOR team to reconsider this approach. Airdrops should be inclusive and acknowledge the contributions of all community members—not just those with means or extensive networks. Let’s prioritize fairness and rebuild trust within our communities, ensuring that everyone who believed in this project feels seen and appreciated.
In an era where community engagement is paramount, it’s essential for projects like MAJOR to recognize that true loyalty comes from valuing every member’s contribution equally. Only then can we foster a thriving ecosystem where everyone benefits from their involvement.