The Last Time I'll Talk About Backpack, and Also Discussing My Airdrop Farming Principles

比推Publicado em 2026-03-23Última atualização em 2026-03-23

Resumo

The author outlines two primary approaches to airdrop farming (referred to as "撸毛"): a labor-intensive" method of mass participation in many projects, and their own "sniper" method. The sniper approach relies on a rigorous four-point checklist to filter projects and avoid "industrial garbage." The checklist evaluates: 1. **Team (People):** Founders must be intelligent, have strong execution skills, and be genuinely well-intentioned. This is assessed through their social media content and, if possible, personal interactions. 2. **Product (Product-Market Fit):** The product must have a clear market fit, be delivered competently, and the team must show a responsible attitude towards its quality, avoiding releases full of basic errors. 3. **Narrative (Story):** The project should operate in a promising, unproven narrative within Web3 that also aligns with major investment trends in Web2 (e.g., AI). 4. **Timing & Cost (Market Conditions):** Avoid participating when market sentiment is overly FOMO-driven and participation costs are high. If an opportunity causes hesitation, it's best to skip it, as overcrowded airdrops yield minimal or negative returns. Applying this framework, the author explains why they avoided heavily farming the Backpack exchange airdrop: * **Narrative:** They are skeptical of the "compliant CEX" narrative, questioning its unique selling point against giants like Binance and OKX. * **Product:** They criticize Backpack's frequent technical failures, r...

Author: Princess Christine (@0xsexybanana)


There are actually two methodologies for airdrop farming:

The first, I believe, is the Old Dong school: cast a wide net, compete on execution. It's essentially a labor-intensive studio logic, where as long as the cost per account is kept low enough, you go and蹭 (participate in/get involved with) every project. The fault tolerance of this model is extremely high; as long as you hit one epic-level big airdrop, it can cover all the sunk costs of being "反撸" (counter-farmed/denied the airdrop).

The second is my school. Similar to Today Capital's Xu Xin's "Sniper Approach" – heavily invest in research, participate deeply. Use logical screening to exclude industrial garbage from the firing range in advance. (This is also why I say that the projects I'm bullish on might not necessarily succeed, but the ones I'm not bullish on will definitely not succeed. My project research checklist can filter out most of the minefields.)

——————

So what is this checklist? 4 dimensions:

1, Team (People Harmony): Smart enough, good enough execution, good enough heart. None can be missing.

How to judge: Use the founder's tweets to judge if this person is a big brain or just a frontman brought in to只会cx (only know how to shill) and shout slogans. Understand if they are sufficiently humble and nice through offline meetings. Many founders' tweets are so hollow they only know how to shout slogans, lacking insight into their own industry.

For most airdrop farmers, it's relatively difficult to接触 (contact/interact with) project teams. Even if you're a KOL and have had offline contact with the project team, it's hard to judge when the project teams put on their social masks.

2, Product (Geographical Advantage):

Here there are another 3 dimensions. 1) The product itself has PMF (Product-Market Fit). 2) The team's product delivery is到位 (up to standard/executed well). 3) The team has a responsible attitude towards their product.

How to judge? They never release shoddy product versions at any time; they have product pursuit. Look at OKX for example; whether they are delivering an early-stage or a mature product, they never hand over a product full of低级错误 (low-level mistakes) to users.

3, Narrative (Geographical Advantage): Being on a relatively new, un-falsified track, and enjoying an extremely high valuation premium.

How to judge? You need to evaluate whether this narrative has炒作空间 (hype potential) in Web3 and whether it is a capital风口 (hot trend) in Web2 – the hype logic of these two is often synchronized.

This is also why I heavily bet on Openmind last year: the AI + robotics track was a trillion-dollar darling in Web2 and was far from being falsified in Web3. (Although it later encountered an epic反撸 (counter-farm/airdrop denial), resulting in a zero airdrop, but that belongs to a black swan event of another dimension, let's not discuss it here.)

4, Time and Cost (Heavenly Timing):

Is market sentiment extremely FOMO or extremely pessimistic? Is the participation cost low or high?

How to judge FOMO? When your Twitter feed is full of airdrop influencers calling you to farm, and everyone is bullish on the next xxx-level opportunity, and your participation cost is high, you will feel hesitant.

If you feel hesitant, it's best not to participate.

In the current crypto circle, when an opportunity is participated in by everyone, it won't be a big airdrop opportunity. The profit pool of this 1.5-level market simply cannot bear such a large volume. Even if it's a good project, if everyone farms it, a big airdrop becomes a small one, a small one becomes nothing, and nothing becomes a big loss.

——————————————————————————

So now, based on this checklist, why didn't I focus on farming Backpack?

1. Narrative Logic: Pseudo-demand and Regulatory Shackles

I've said on Twitter long ago that I'm not bullish on the narrative of "compliant centralized exchanges." Why did Hyperliquid rise? A large part of the增量 (increment/growth) came precisely from users' tax avoidance and anti-censorship needs. Under an increasingly harsh compliance framework, facing mature giants like Binance and OKX, where is Backpack's moat? Where will its incremental users come from? What is the Unique Selling Point that makes users not use Gate, MEXC, but have to use Backpack? I still haven't figured it out.

2) Product: Lack of Reverence for Product Delivery

I rarely see any exchange's technical foundation as拉垮 (shoddy/poor) as Backpack's. Countless outages, rollbacks, and multiple large-scale user compensations within half a year. The launch of every new feature reeks of carelessness and敷衍 (perfunctory effort). A team responsible for its users should deliver even the simplest feature completely and smoothly, not serve up a粗糙 (crudely) made半成品 (half-finished product).

In contrast, look at Hyperliquid; even in its extremely early days with only 2000 followers, you could hardly see any肉眼可见的 (visible to the naked eye) Bugs (the only drawback at the time was poor liquidity, and it was jokingly called Hyperliquidated).

Early in '24, a friend硬拉着 (dragged me hard) to farm BP. I remember clearly that Backpack was so简陋 (rudimentary/simple) it only had BTC and SOL trading pairs. But instead of polishing the product and enriching the coin variety, they started疯狂拉人头 (frantically pulling in people) with the gimmick of "farm trading volume for SOL ecosystem token airdrops." This typical "growth running ahead of the product" approach暴露 (exposed) the management's extreme lack of operational experience and systematic strategy, purely a草台班 (makeshift operation/amateur hour).

These small observations made me very下头 (turn off/turned off) by backpack, and I一直拒绝参与 (consistently refused to participate in) its airdrop farming.

3) Time and Cost: Extremely High.

Starting in '25, some zero-fee perpetual exchanges began to流行 (become popular). And at this time, backpack started its season 3. Compared to zero-fee platforms like lighter, I never understood why刷分成本 (farming cost) at 0.5u的 (of) backpack was attractive. So even though all my airdrop farming friends were doing season 3, I chose to避其锋芒 (avoid its锋芒 (sharp edge/peak intensity)).

Until later, with BN's强势 (strong momentum) and exclusive support for meme coins on BSC (i.e., when Chinese tickers like "币安人生" (Binance Life) started to爆火 (explode in popularity)), I observed some distance emerging between the Solana Foundation and Binance, and the foundation似乎 (seemed) to have some sense of crisis. I speculated that the Solana ecosystem might nurture its own CEX to counter Binance's dominance. So I OTC'd 100k points at 0.3 (price). This OTC action was a small bet on whether the Solana ecosystem would vigorously replicate/support BP. But it seems now, they didn't扶 (support/nurture it).

4) Team

I lack close observation and understanding of the bp team, so I won't comment much.

——————

My attitude towards backpack has always been relatively objective. Running an exchange is different from shilling memes; an exchange requires an excellent technical foundation and operational capabilities, which Backpack clearly lacks. They cannot deliver a good product, nor do they have the product operation capabilities to operate features到位 (effectively) (like the previously highly-touted prediction market). Even worse, they vigorously developed compliance, putting growth shackles on themselves before they even grew up.

So I currently regard backpack as a meme coin disguised as a VC coin. As a platform coin, I think a 200M FDV isn't expensive either, currently holding). Of course, this is secondary market speculation logic, and has nothing to do with airdrop farming anymore.


Original link:https://www.bitpush.news/articles/7622623

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat are the two main methodologies for airdrop farming discussed in the article?

AThe first is the labor-intensive 'wide net' approach, focusing on low-cost, high-volume participation across many projects. The second is the 'sniper' approach, which involves heavy research and deep, selective participation based on a strict checklist to avoid low-quality projects.

QWhat are the four dimensions of the author's project research checklist?

AThe four dimensions are: 1. The Team (the right people), 2. The Product (execution and quality), 3. The Narrative (market potential and hype), and 4. Timing and Cost (market sentiment and participation expenses).

QWhy did the author choose not to heavily farm the Backpack airdrop?

AThe author did not farm Backpack heavily due to concerns about its narrative (seeing regulated CEXs as a weak, pseudo-demand), poor product delivery (frequent outages and buggy releases), and high participation costs compared to competitors with zero fees.

QHow does the author ultimately view the Backpack token after its launch?

AThe author views the Backpack token as a 'VC-backed meme coin' rather than a fundamental platform token. They believe its $200 million FDV is not expensive and are holding it, but this is based on secondary market speculation, not airdrop farming logic.

QWhat was the key signal that made the author hesitant to participate in an airdrop opportunity?

AThe key signal is feeling hesitant when an opportunity is highly promoted by every farming influencer, has high participation costs, and creates a sense of FOMO. The author believes that if everyone is participating, the potential reward diminishes significantly.

Leituras Relacionadas

9.42 Million Retail Investors Compete for Changxin Technology, Who Got Allotted?

Evergreen Technology's IPO subscription results are now available. On July 20, the domestic memory chip giant announced the offline preliminary allotment results and online lottery results for its IPO. A total of approximately 9.43 million retail investors participated in the online subscription, generating 770,000 winning lots with a final winning rate of about 0.4714%, setting a record for new shares on the STAR Market. After triggering a clawback mechanism from institutional to retail investors, the online retail allocation was significantly increased to 3.851 billion shares. Simultaneously, 285 institutional investors participated in the offline subscription, ultimately receiving 2.173 billion shares at an allotment rate of approximately 0.1756%. Leading insurers and public funds were among the major recipients. Notably, Liang Wenfeng, founder of the major AI model company DeepSeek, through his quantitative investment firms Ningbo Huanfang Quantitative and Zhejiang Jiuzhang Asset, secured the largest share among private funds, with a total allotment worth approximately 175 million yuan. Estimates suggest potential profits could reach 730 million yuan if Evergreen Technology's market capitalization reaches 3 trillion yuan post-listing. The company is expected to list on July 27 and could become the highest-valued tech stock on the A-share market, with various brokerages providing valuations ranging from 1 trillion to over 4 trillion yuan. However, recent significant corrections in global tech stocks may impact its post-listing performance. (Character count: 1,196)

marsbitHá 19m

9.42 Million Retail Investors Compete for Changxin Technology, Who Got Allotted?

marsbitHá 19m

L2 'Recalibration': When L1 Becomes Its Own Rollup, What Is Ethereum's Endgame?

The article discusses the evolving relationship between Ethereum's Layer 1 (L1) and Layer 2 (L2) solutions, moving beyond the initial "L2 for scaling" model. As Ethereum L1 itself scales (increasing Gas Limit, statelessness, zkEVM), the unique value proposition of L2s shifts from merely providing cheap execution to offering differentiated features like application-specific optimization, privacy, and flexible governance. The piece explores three key themes: 1. **L2's New Role:** L2s are transitioning from a pure scaling technology to a spectrum of execution environments with varying degrees of security inheritance from Ethereum L1. 2. **Interoperability as State Trust:** Solving L2 fragmentation is less about cross-chain bridges and more about enabling faster, trust-minimized state verification between environments. This involves initiatives like faster L1 finality, intent-based architectures (Open Intents Framework), and native account abstraction. 3. **Blurring Layers:** With the potential integration of zk-proofs into L1 validation (making L1 akin to its own "Rollup") and the concept of "Native Rollups," the rigid boundary between L1 and L2 may fade. The future could be a unified system with multiple execution domains (for DeFi, gaming, privacy, etc.) sharing a common security, settlement, and state framework. In conclusion, Ethereum's goal is not to abandon L2s or re-centralize everything on L1, but to re-integrate the fragmented user experience—liquidity, accounts, applications—while preserving the scaling benefits of a multi-environment ecosystem. The endgame is a cohesive "one chain" feeling for users, powered by diverse but securely interconnected execution layers.

marsbitHá 1h

L2 'Recalibration': When L1 Becomes Its Own Rollup, What Is Ethereum's Endgame?

marsbitHá 1h

Trading

Spot
活动图片