Suggestion on $Linea

You didn’t understand what I was saying. The point is that no matter how harmful for some participants this decision was, it would be better for the team not to deviate from the plan. Twitching, the desire to please someone contrary to your initial plans is a sign of weakness and insecurity in your actions. In this pursuit with the desire to please everyone, you can come to a result when absolutely everyone will be dissatisfied. I was there on the day of the announcement of the LXP distribution for NFT and I can assure you that about 99% of the community was satisfied with this decision, thinking it was

So yeah, we can call a minority those who are unsatisfied. In their view, it was unfair, although 99% think otherwise. So what are we going to say now, that 1% are geniuses and 99% are madmen? No, we won’t, because all market participants have different views of fairness, which may not coincide. The decision to invest and get extra income lay on your shoulders, I will repeat once again. Blaming someone for the fact that you overinvested is, in my opinion, the wrong strategy. Each profit is accompanied by risks that are often difficult to predict. That’s why you get huge extra income in crypto, because the risks here are colossal compared to traditional finance

What kind of concepts of morality you want from me if this distribution is 100% subjective thing. All moralities and norms were created by society, if you didn’t now. If those norms accepted by 99% of Linea community don’t agree with yours, it doesn’t mean that someone is abnormal, it means that you have different ideas about the norms, where the majority thinks differently than you.

Excuse me, you’re saying “it’s a sign of humility and strength. The strongest people accept their mistakes, correct them, and adapt quickly.”, but what kind of humility can we expect if it’s basically 1% of community being unsatisfied ? It’s excatly what you’re defending saying

Linea said there were really some problems with fairness, but overall they prevented whales to accumulate high steaks of LXP on accounts, which is quite healthy to my mind. At the end of the day, what’s the difference if for example max allo goes to those who hold >8k LXP. Even if those NFTs gave you like 100k LXP it wouldn’t change anything, just a matter of numbers. Or you want speculate and earn 100x times more buying NFTs than those who spent days and nights grinding onchain, creating a gigantic inequality gap ? And after this you tell me about norms and morality?

I’m an old participant of the market as well, and from my experience I learnt that blaming someone else except yourself and your risk management is always a sign of immature. Blaming someone else for your personal decision and chase for greed and profits is not a healthy thing. The team apologized for those 1% of unsatisfied, about not having met their expectations. But I gues when it comes to saving 99% you won’t change the pland and structure of distribution.

Greed is not appropriate here. Those who bought different tiers were better awarded purely by chance. It doesn’t gurantee it will work well for them the next time in different projects. Just pure random. We can speculate that a person who owns one tier is likely want to collect NFTs of different tiers in order to collect and not repeat themselves, but honestly, this is already esotericism, for which I do not have the strength and time. What happened, is what happened, I am very sorry for your situation. But changing your shoes on the go and making adjustments regarding already solved problems with TGE in a couple of months is not a very rational idea.

1 Like

You set the rules that suited you before the distribution, choosing to take the risk and buy several NFTs from the secondary market (the team didn’t specify the distribution method). Now, when things aren’t going in your favor you’re demanding to cancel everything!

Do you really want to open a door to hell for the team just because things didn’t turn out the way you hoped? You accepted the risk from the start so you have no right to complain now. I suggest you move forward and focus on other matters

4 Likes

I just hope they are checking up on the discussion here

1 Like

Yess it was tough to all of us after tge delayed news hoping more updates very soon

1 Like

The most important topic now is tokenomics. Let’s wait for Linea team’s announcement. They said it will be released in following weeks.

2 Likes

Waiting for tokenomics.
Hope this will be delivered this week

1 Like

Let’s hope for the best, my friend.
The crucial pitfall to my mind is uncertainty across the community.

A checker is always about surprises, speculations and unexpectedness. This coin has two sides.

If you give a checker too early, then all the speculations and warmed up interest will evaporate, people will immediately have a clear plan of action, which is difficult to simulate in a situation when the checker appears on the day of TGE and decisions about holding or selling tokens must be made instantly.

The second side, the opposite of what I mentioned, is fear. People are afraid that after such a long wait and uncertainty, all their time and hopes will be in vain. Many just want to know the reward they deserve.

And it’s good if projects are able to balance between these two sides, not getting into FUD, but from Linea’s point of view, after all those delays the situation becomes much worse, obliging you to immediately choose that very second side of “certainty”. The market is terrible, especially everything related to ERC-20, people are angry, hungry and tired, it is difficult to play with people in such a mood, they are very sensitive to any negativity towards them (remember yourself, when was the last time you slept for 3-5 hours for a couple of days in a row, remember how irritating noise and other little things seemed to you - many people in the crypto space feel exactly the same way now).

The Linea team literally brought the situation to the boiling point. Yes, I understand that regulatory problems exist and you can’t escape them, but the team has all the cards up its sleeve to at least give a checker and give people certainty. Imagine the emotions of a person who found out about the TGE delay two years later since mainnet, and after this delay waited a few more months to find out his allocation and see 0 there. People just want transparency and certainty, speculation in such a market is exhausting…

1 Like

Do we have any update regarding tokenomics and criteria?

1 Like

No, they don’t seem to care anymore. In February, Christopher promised tokenomics in a few weeks, but now it seems quite normal that Linea team is breaking its promises for the hundredth time

1 Like

Hi thirteen, no one promised that it will happen this month, it was only a desire expressed by Christopher, but he didn’t confirm it. Once we have updates, we will let you know. Please stop sharing this narrative around other posts as it just creates more confusion and people actually believe it, resulting in FUD. You’re free to share your opinions/feedback here but please use factual information.

2 Likes


“We could have allocation published in weeks” generally implies within a few weeks, typically meaning less than a month (around 2–3 weeks). If it were expected to take longer, he would likely have said “in a month” or “in the coming months” instead.

Since it’s now been almost a month, the delay contradicts his original statement.

2 Likes

Could implies a possibility not a promise, this is where my point was explained above as well (Wording your feedback to something like “the team broke their promise” is incorrect and can just result in FUD based off of incorrect information. That’s why I’ve corrected you above), you’re free to express your frustration/ feedback as you know by now as long as it is factual.

2 Likes

I think you’re replying to the wrong guy here, I never said the team broke a promise or anything like that. I simply shared the original message as it was written. The message clearly stated that token allocation could be published in weeks, which naturally set an expectation of a few weeks, not nearly a month with no update.

The issue here isn’t about wording but about managing expectations. If things changed, a quick update would have helped clear up any confusion. Instead of focusing on semantics, can we just get a straightforward update on when the community can actually expect the tokenomics?

1 Like

Thanks for the clarification, I see you didn’t mention the word “promise” might have gotten caught up with everyone else trying to go with that narrative and I might have misunderstood the context a bit. The team is working hard and once the info is available it will be shared. Thanks for providing the above feedback. :linea_mod: :coffee:

1 Like

I never FUDded the project or made any false claims, I believe in stating facts. I completely understand that delays in TGE can happen, and I’ve said multiple times that I have no issue with that. However, in my opinion, tokenomics and checkers are aspects that Linea has full control over.

If Christopher mentioned that the tokenomics could be published within a few weeks, then logically, it should have been by now. If there’s a delay for any reason, instead of saying it was never mentioned, providing an update would be far more beneficial for everyone. Clear communication helps maintain trust and keeps the community informed.

2 Likes

Hi, it seems to me that some users of the project forget about the essence of TGE and the purpose of token distribution - the project itself decides how, in what %, when and what criteria are needed to receive a share for participation.

2 Likes