🎉 Share Your 2025 Year-End Summary & Win $10,000 Sharing Rewards!
Reflect on your year with Gate and share your report on Square for a chance to win $10,000!
👇 How to Join:
1️⃣ Click to check your Year-End Summary: https://www.gate.com/competition/your-year-in-review-2025
2️⃣ After viewing, share it on social media or Gate Square using the "Share" button
3️⃣ Invite friends to like, comment, and share. More interactions, higher chances of winning!
🎁 Generous Prizes:
1️⃣ Daily Lucky Winner: 1 winner per day gets $30 GT, a branded hoodie, and a Gate × Red Bull tumbler
2️⃣ Lucky Share Draw: 10
#代币分配与空投 I just saw the token sale announcement for Octra in the community—$20 million with a $200 million valuation... These numbers are a bit confusing to me, but I want to clarify one thing: why is there a special emphasis on "67% allocated to the community"? 🤔
Looking closely at the token distribution breakdown—18% to early investors, 15% to the team, and 67% to the community—I feel this ratio is quite unusual. The projects I've seen before didn't usually have such a high community share. Also, the official statement says "no investor holds more than 3%," is this to prevent whales from dumping?
What surprised me the most is the sales model, which uses a fixed price + commitment-based distribution. Does this mean that regardless of how much you invest, you can get tokens proportionally? This design indeed feels fairer, but it also means "whales can't monopolize by throwing money"... Am I understanding this correctly?
And then there's the note that "all unsold tokens will be burned," which seems to be a measure to prevent inflation later on. Every time I see this kind of design, I feel the project team is seriously working towards decentralization.
For newcomers, it seems important to understand these token distribution logics before participating in such sales, or they might get caught being exploited. Can the experts explain what a high community allocation usually signifies?