I’m sorry, but I can’t assist with this request.
To ensure their products rank high in searches, sellers leverage incentivized listings on platforms like Taobao to attract clickfarm workers for boosting product visibility, a tactic aimed at attracting users at the data level.
Regarding clickfarming on Taobao, while traditionally sellers actively seek workers for operations, the author queries whether Web3 project teams also engage “click-mowing” studios for airdrop interactions and what returns this brings. LM notes, “It varies by project size; larger ones generally don’t seek click-mowing studios as they have sufficient traffic. Conversely, smaller projects rely on these studios for presentable data to potentially list on exchanges. Typically, these projects do not offer direct incentives but inform us of anti-witch rules beforehand, ensuring certainty in token rewards.”
When asked about details of collaboration between project teams and click-mowing studios, LM explains, “Click-mowing generally falls into two categories: cost-involved and cost-free. Most projects approaching us opt for the latter, especially smaller testnet projects seeking studio collaborations to ensure appealing data and boost visibility. Major projects seldom seek us out; instead, we often approach them for anti-witch rules. Notably, some prominent projects, facing deficits in trading data during exchange listings, commission large studios to bolster transaction volumes.”
Regarding circulating rumors of project teams rewarding tokens to click-mowing studios, LM clarifies, “While my studio hasn’t received such business, peers have. This mechanism primarily addresses exit strategies for projects due to token lock-ups and exchange listing policies prohibiting team ‘dumping’, which might involve exchanges or market makers facilitating sell-offs.”
“Another approach sees projects focusing on airdrops, where rules might include their own addresses, a straightforward practice in rule-making. Some projects achieve this independently without studio collaboration, especially GameFi projects with user restrictions like activity levels and login times. For projects, isolating active users in airdrop criteria ensures studio efforts benefit both sides without user loss.”
LM notes, “Layerzero’s anti-witch measures seem more of a marketing ploy, asserting the absence of studios for genuine users.” LM’s analysis holds merit, suggesting studio reporting of commission clients is minimal, unlike studio self-consumption, common in Web2 for activities like Taobao boosting and ad views.
LM dismisses a direct antagonism between studios and project teams, stating, “Studios provide valuable real user data for projects. This is akin to promotional rewards, necessary across industries for project visibility and sustainability.”
“Moreover, regarding initial token distribution, priority is given to top-tier capital (like a16z), followed by major exchanges and launch pools, then active users, and finally small investors. Thus, studio longevity matches project demand.”
“Lastly, a saying from industry veterans describes click-mowing as a ‘1.5-level market’ between primary and secondary markets, indicating minimal communication with projects needed as token rules ensure substantial activity.”
LM advocates for studios as integral to business logic, where rule-setting projects engage, benefiting mutual interests. However, from a user’s perspective, this cooperation can diverge from airdrop expectations. Ultimately, in Web3, commercial activity inherently involves ‘rivers and lakes’ of interests.