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

The Largest IPO in History Ignites Heated Debate: Is SpaceX Worth $1.77 Trillion?

SpaceX's potential IPO is priced at $135 per share, aiming to raise $75 billion and valuing the company at approximately $1.77 trillion, which would make it the largest IPO in history. This valuation has sparked intense debate among investors. Bullish analysts, including major underwriters Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, argue the valuation is justified by SpaceX's long-term potential. They see it not just as a rocket company but as a future leader in space infrastructure, with key growth drivers being Starlink satellite internet, low-cost rocket launches, and future AI-related ventures. They project revenues reaching hundreds of billions to trillions of dollars by 2030-2040. ARK Invest's model suggests a 2030 enterprise value could reach $2.5 trillion. Bearish analysts from independent research firms like Morningstar, PitchBook, and New Constructs contend the IPO price is excessively high, already pricing in unrealistic future growth. Using DCF and sum-of-the-parts models, they estimate fair value between $780 billion and $1.7 trillion, significantly below the IPO target. They highlight risks such as the speculative nature of AI projections, over-dependence on Elon Musk, high growth expectations, and corporate governance concerns. Trefis set a target price of just $79 per share. While both sides acknowledge SpaceX's unique position in commercial space, the core disagreement centers on whether the $135 share price offers a reasonable margin of safety or is overly optimistic. Despite the valuation controversy, reported strong demand for the IPO indicates significant market interest.

marsbitHá 50m

The Largest IPO in History Ignites Heated Debate: Is SpaceX Worth $1.77 Trillion?

marsbitHá 50m

After the Passage of the GENIUS Act and the CLARITY Act, What Is the Correct Architecture for On-Chain Yield?

The article discusses the evolution of on-chain credit, distinguishing three markets: overcollateralized crypto lending, unsecured lending (largely unsuccessful), and asset-backed credit (ABC). ABC, backed by identifiable real-world collateral with legal recourse, is identified as the fastest-growing category and the only one credibly addressing adverse selection—the core problem in credit where the riskiest borrowers self-select. Current growth in on-chain Real World Assets (RWAs), particularly tokenized private credit funds (e.g., Maple Finance, Centrifuge), is substantial but often merely "wraps" existing fund structures, inheriting their risks rather than solving adverse selection at the protocol level. The regulatory landscape is a key driver, with the US GENIUS Act (prohibiting stablecoin issuers from paying yield) and the proposed CLARITY Act (closing loopholes on indirect yield) set to redefine permissible yield-bearing products. This makes vaults (like ERC-4626) the critical architecture—they become the primary compliant vehicle for delivering yield, functioning as issuance, disclosure, distribution, and recovery mechanisms. The author's thesis is that the correct post-GENIUS/CLARITY architecture involves building ABC solutions where credit assessment, structure, and recovery are encoded directly into the smart contract vault layer, moving beyond mere tokenized fund wrappers to solve adverse selection fundamentally and ensure regulatory compliance.

Foresight NewsHá 1h

After the Passage of the GENIUS Act and the CLARITY Act, What Is the Correct Architecture for On-Chain Yield?

Foresight NewsHá 1h

TechFlow Intelligence Bureau: Anthropic's New Model Fable Sparks Controversy by Restricting Biosafety Research, US CPI Soars to 4.2%, a Three-Year High

**Summary of TechFlow Intelligence Report:** The newsletter covers several key tech and finance developments. In AI, Anthropic's new Fable model faced backlash for secretly limiting biomedical research capabilities and enforcing a 30-day data retention policy, prompting the company to promise more transparent adjustments. In a related story, Anthropic's founder revealed his departure from OpenAI was due to dishonesty from Sam Altman, not safety concerns. Meanwhile, OpenAI is considering significant price cuts to compete with Anthropic, potentially sparking a price war. In crypto/Web3, BlackRock filed a new amendment for a yield-generating Bitcoin ETF, while Bank of America's CEO warned that stablecoin yields could drain trillions from traditional banks. U.S. Senator Cynthia Lummis advocated for the U.S. to officially accumulate Bitcoin reserves. In hardware, Nvidia released the DiffusionGemma-2-6B image model optimized for efficient inference, and AMD promoted its unified memory architecture to challenge Nvidia's dominance. TSMC's CFO hinted at possible price increases due to soaring AI chip demand. A major legal ruling in Germany held Google legally responsible for inaccurate information generated by its AI Overviews feature. Google Chrome also moved to fully block ad-blocker workarounds like uBlock Origin. Macroeconomic headlines included U.S. CPI rising to 4.2% (a 3-year high) and Iran's complete closure of the Strait of Hormuz, raising oil price and inflation fears. South Korean markets saw continued volatility with massive foreign capital outflow. Other notable stories: Microsoft expanded its Copilot AI assistant "Mico" globally; a study found r/wallstreetbets users' stock picks outperformed Wall Street; a fully autonomous drone killed a human soldier for the first time, raising AI ethics concerns; and a Chinese hospital used brain-computer interface technology to help a blind person "see." The overarching theme connects debates over AI boundaries and responsibility (Anthropic's restrictions, Google's liability, lethal autonomous drones) with real-world economic and geopolitical turmoil (inflation, Strait of Hormuz closure, market instability), highlighting the tense interplay between technological advancement and global chaos.

marsbitHá 1h

TechFlow Intelligence Bureau: Anthropic's New Model Fable Sparks Controversy by Restricting Biosafety Research, US CPI Soars to 4.2%, a Three-Year High

marsbitHá 1h

Alibaba's Yet Another New Business Division: What Signal Does It Send?

Alibaba has established a new "Token Foundry" business unit, merging its Tongyi large model division and Future Life Lab. Led directly by Group CEO Wu Yongming, this marks the company's third significant AI organizational reshuffle in 2026, following the creation of the Alibaba Token Hub (ATH) and a Group Technology Committee. The move signals a strategic shift from consolidating AI resources to accelerating productization and commercialization. The "Token Foundry" name reflects Alibaba's ambition to become a foundational supplier in the AI era, focusing on model development and commercial application. Key teams, including those behind the high-performing HappyHorse video generation model, have been integrated into the new unit. Concurrently, Zhou Jingren, architect of the Qwen model series, has been appointed Group Chief Scientist to lead a new AI Future Research Institute, focusing on long-term technological breakthroughs like Agent capabilities. This restructuring creates a clear four-layer AI architecture within Alibaba: the research institute for frontier exploration, Token Foundry for core models and commercialization, MaaS for platform services, and business units like Qianwen (C端) and Wukong (B端) for end-user applications. The adjustments align with a global trend among tech giants like Google and Microsoft to centralize AI leadership under the CEO and deeply integrate research with business units. The urgency is driven by a narrowing competitive window. Alibaba has announced its AI business is now entering a commercialization phase, with AI-related revenue seeing triple-digit growth for eleven consecutive quarters. The company faces intense competition in the MaaS (Model-as-a-Service) sector from rivals like ByteDance and Tencent. The Token Foundry initiative represents Alibaba's effort to streamline execution and enhance competitiveness in this critical, fast-evolving landscape.

marsbitHá 2h

Alibaba's Yet Another New Business Division: What Signal Does It Send?

marsbitHá 2h

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片