Incase you're wondering, this
post is what inspired this my topic. So It's no news that we are at a period where airdrop projects are flying around thanks to telegram mini app which is where most of these projects are cooking. With the airdrops trend I have come across many topics relating to it especially in the area of scam about some these mining project after which people might have spent their time executing different tasks daily for months just to be told towards its end that they have to pay some TON to stand a chance of gaining from the airdrop which some don't eventually fulfill their promise.
Now from a different angle aside from an airdrop project been regarded to as scammers when they request people to pay some TON and didn't airdropped. What about a scenario where a project after requesting for such payment from participants actually airdropped but to just about 15% of their participants out of a 100% that made that TON payment task. Can that still be regarded as some form of scam? since the notion has been that most of these airdrops that request some fee to be paid don't usually fulfill their promise.
This is the rise of airlift projects- No doubt, in a space like Telegram, this obviously brings both opportunity and risk. When the payment by a project to pay in TONs or other currencies is required, then that provides a fifty-fifty space for operations considered legitimate and operations that may be fraud.
The situation you describe in which only a small percentage of participants receives contracted air transportation after payment has been made. This raises ethical issues. Most of it is hands-on exploration. This is especially true if the project is marketed as a fair opportunity for all. Although some participants received tokens But a lack of transparency and equitable distribution can still reflect negatively on the project and may be considered misleading.
In the final analysis Participants are expected to research and exercise caution in any project. It is important to pay in advance. The tendency to use airdrops as a marketing tool can blur the boundaries between true community building and opportunistic practices.
Maybe that will not be a scam but most people will still considered that is scam reminds they are not asked to pay some TON before the the airdrop gives. The owner of the project must clarify the procedure to people before they run the airdrop programs so people will not be misunderstanding with the rules. I guess that is miscommunication between the teams and people who want to do many tasks to get the rewards from the airdrop. If the teams can explain about the requirement before they run the project, maybe the misunderstanding will not happen. People will choose the project by themselves and will decide if they want to pay some TON as fees or will search the airdrop programs that will be free.
Therefore, project owners should develop all requirements and procedures relating to wind turbines well ahead of time. This will help to avoid misunderstandings in all participants since transparency tends to ward off fraudulent perceptions.
When people know exactly what they're going to get They can make their decision on whether they like to join or apply free opportunities; it's all about open communication between the project team and the community. When teams focus on clarity, then it may lead to excellent outputs for everyone who is using these resources.