2026-01-04 22:26:29

Wallchain Quackers has provided feedback to the AlignerZ Labs team, suggesting using native tokens instead of stablecoins for community incentives — this clearly shows alignment between the community and the project team in ecosystem development.

What’s more worth noting is the pace of USDC payments. Once the funds are in place before the IWO launch, token holders can directly use them to participate in the TVS NFT bidding. This design can facilitate smoother fund flow. Many projects are optimizing such processes, as liquidity and participation thresholds often determine the actual popularity of the event.

USDC0,04%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

11 Likes

Reward
11
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MentalWealthHarvester

· 01-05 19:00

Native token incentives are indeed more aggressive; stablecoins are too mediocre. --- As for the USDC arrival time, honestly, it's just to avoid cold start issues. --- When capital flows smoothly, the hype naturally increases; this logic is sound. --- Another optimization of the capital chain; it seems everyone is competing in this now. --- I've seen this bidding strategy for vesting NFTs before; the key is whether it can truly become liquid later on. --- Lowering the threshold attracts more players; making it too simple makes it seem cheap. Finding the right balance is difficult. --- Aligning cognition sounds good, but I'm worried it will just be empty talk in the end. --- Getting the IWO in place early is good; it saves trouble. --- It sounds nice, but the core issue is how to get the money moving.

View OriginalReply0

NeverVoteOnDAO

· 01-04 22:54

Stablecoin incentives are a bit boring; native tokens are the real deal.

View OriginalReply0

airdrop_whisperer

· 01-04 22:53

Native token incentives do help retain people better. Stablecoins? That's just free riding. --- USDC deposit time is well-controlled. This design really considers liquidity; not all projects are this attentive. --- Basically, it's about who can make the money flow more smoothly. Lower participation thresholds naturally increase enthusiasm. This logic makes sense. --- Wait, native token incentives sound good, but it depends on whether the project itself has real value support. Otherwise, if it collapses later, it's all for nothing. --- Community feedback being so timely and aligned at least shows that AlignerZ is really listening, unlike some projects that just hype themselves.

View OriginalReply0

BearMarketBro

· 01-04 22:52

Native token incentives are indeed more imaginative; the stablecoin approach is too boring. --- Wait, why is the USDC arrival time so tight? It could easily cause problems. --- The NFT bidding design is pretty good; it all depends on whether real participation can keep up. --- It's hardest when the community and project team have the same ideas, but that's not bad. --- The issue of liquidity bottlenecks has been discussed for a long time; when can it truly be solved? --- No, native token incentives are much stronger than stablecoins; smart people can see that clearly. --- A smooth capital flow sounds good, but in actual operation, it still depends on execution. --- Quackers' suggestion shows they are really thinking, unlike some communities that are just idle. --- Can the bidding mechanism boost popularity, or is it just for show?

View OriginalReply0

NftRegretMachine

· 01-04 22:51

Native token incentives are indeed more effective and more visually appealing than stablecoins.

View OriginalReply0

TokenUnlocker