2026-01-16 02:43:48

A few noteworthy messages I came across this morning.

X platform's official statement indicates a policy adjustment for developer APIs, explicitly banning applications that reward users for posting on the platform—this is clearly targeting the "mouth-lip" projects. It seems many people think this wave of "mouth-lip" projects is coming to an end, but I don't necessarily agree. Ultimately, it depends on whether the project teams are willing to keep pushing; as the saying goes, there are policies above and countermeasures below, the key is to assess whether it's worth continuing. While regulatory pressure is increasing, there may still be room to maneuver and not entirely shut down.

Another hot topic is Zama's NFT minting event opening a recharge channel, with the current participation threshold set at 200U, equivalent to 40,000 quotas. Those looking to ride this wave of popularity should act quickly.

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.

21 Likes

Reward
21
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

AllInAlice

· 01-19 02:15

Talking about "mouth farming," it's really a case of policies above and countermeasures below. The key is whether the project team is willing to spend money to tinker. Zama's $200 threshold is indeed low, but with such dispersed limits, there are probably few who can really make a profit. It's not surprising that X's policies are tightening; it was about time to regulate, but this thing won't die. Let's wait and see who dares to continue breaking the rules. Trying with $200, just to test the waters, what if? Mouth farming won't cool down; it just means changing the disguise. The saying "there are countermeasures below" is correct; it all depends on who has better technology. The profits are all with the top projects; small new projects aren't really worth it.

View OriginalReply0

GasGuzzler

· 01-16 03:09

Lips should have been regulated long ago, but is it really completely shut down this time? Not necessarily, let's see how the project team manipulates it. This 200U threshold for Zama feels like another tactic to cut leeks, but some people will still rush in. This round of X's adjustment is basically about clearing the track, but there's always a loophole in Web3. Policies can't keep up with innovation, it's always the same situation. Wait, is it really going to fail this time? My airdrops were all wasted.

View OriginalReply0

SnapshotLaborer

· 01-16 03:06

It's indeed not that easy to die with just mouth farming, the project team really has plenty of ways to cause trouble. This 200U threshold for Zama is quite interesting, jump on board quickly. This wave of bans by X is just bluffing; if they really cut it off, no one will play anymore. I think it still depends on how it is implemented later, but there will definitely be gray areas. 200U for a 40,000 limit, this calculation needs to be carefully considered to see if it's worth it. Big companies harvest, small projects look for gaps, an eternal game of chess. Missing out on this Zama wave might lead to regret; the window of opportunity is so short. The mouth farming projects have already been thinking of countermeasures, haha. With the new policy coming out, it might actually be an opportunity? Who knows. Zama's quota is so scarce, no wonder everyone is urging.

View OriginalReply0

TokenomicsDetective

· 01-16 03:05

Mouth-licking projects definitely won't die outright; the threshold just got higher. Let's see who can survive until the next wave. The 200U threshold for Zama... thinking about it, maybe forget it and wait to see if there are other opportunities. This wave of bans, frankly, can't kill them; it's just making everyone find new ways to play. Mouth-licking isn't that easy to cool off; it's just a matter of doing it more discreetly. Entering Zama with 200U is a bit expensive; better to wait for an opportunity. Policy tightening is common; genuine project teams aren't afraid at all. This round of Zama's popularity indeed came quickly, but the 200U threshold discouraged many people. Mouth-licking can't die, it all depends on whether the project teams are willing to spend effort to find new tricks.

View OriginalReply0

AirdropF5Bro

· 01-16 02:58

No fear in this round of Zama, the project teams that really want to play have already thought of countermeasures. When policies loosen a bit, they will rush in—that's their nature. As for the Zama quota... 200U for 40,000 tokens, calculate whether it's worth it or not. This round of regulation came too suddenly, but I see many projects simply can't stop. It really depends on who can come up with new tricks later; there have been many cases of being banned. By the way, will Zama this time be another scam to fleece the investors? The stricter the regulation, the more creative the project teams become. I bet this round won't die out.

View OriginalReply0

CryingOldWallet

· 01-16 02:55

Talking about projects won't die easily; just changing the approach is all it takes Starting at a 200U threshold? Interesting, but how far Zama can be pumped remains to be seen This wave of bans by X feels like bluffing; there are still ways to play if you really want to Zama's quota is gone as soon as it's snatched up; is there still a chance to catch a bargain now? It's a bit uncertain Policy pressure is high, but no one is really quitting; it's just about rebranding and continuing Entering Zama with 200U, this price point for the underlying assets is indeed attractive The doom theory of "mouth-lifting" is too absolute; the key is whether there's still money to keep throwing in How long can Zama's current hype last? Feels like a flash in the pan again Bans have never been able to stop those who want to make money; there's always a loophole in technology The 200U threshold seems like an attempt to discourage retail investors

View OriginalReply0