#代币经济设计 Seeing this transcript of Lighter's call, my mind flashes back to the TGE projects I've seen over the past decade. From the earliest reckless enthusiasm, to the carefully crafted designs, and now to this strategic approach—honestly, the evolution of tokenomics is encapsulated in these details.

Releasing 25% of the supply in the first round, reserving 25% for subsequent incentives, a three-year vesting period for investors, and all transaction fees flowing back into the ecosystem and buybacks rather than dividends—this combination shows that the team is trying to avoid the classic pitfalls of the past. I remember early projects where token distribution was one-size-fits-all, with immediate dump after listing, investors cashing out, and the ecosystem left to fend for itself. Lighter clearly learned from those lessons.

The most interesting point is point 5—the design where CEXs cannot withdraw. This may seem simple, but in fact, it’s a technical hedge against market liquidity excesses causing a collapse. I saw a prototype of this idea in some projects last year, but never so thoroughly implemented.

However, to be honest, having 50% of the supply in the first two rounds of airdrops and reserves is a bet on sustained incentives and long-term ecosystem expansion. If the S3 incentive design is flawed, or if the Q1 unified margin mechanism faces obstacles, the token’s value support could create a vacuum. Historically, high-quality tokenomics can last three to five years, but only a handful can maintain popularity beyond five years.

Lighter’s meticulous regulatory groundwork is commendable. But no matter how sophisticated the token design, ultimately, it depends on how much real value the protocol itself can generate. This logic remains unchanged through the ages.