RaylsLabs has encountered interesting issues with its non-standard protocols in operation. The project refuses to adopt templated tokenomics designs, disables common "vampire attack" protection terms, and even embeds some unusual logic into the smart contracts.

Most painfully, their testnet incentive mechanism—using vulnerabilities themselves to award rewards. In other words, the project's reward system relies on the operational flaws of the contract itself, which is undoubtedly an awkward design cycle.

This reflects that, in the rush to innovate, basic security considerations are often put aside. For developers, this serves as a warning: while non-standardized designs may bring new ideas, greater caution is needed in incentive mechanisms and risk control. Both project teams and participants must keep a sharp eye on those "twisted" mechanism designs.