Catizen’s CATI Coin Airdrop Sparks Controversy Among Players

Player Backlash Erupts Over CATI Coin Airdrop Distribution

Player Discontent and Outcry

Following Catizen’s recent distribution of CATI coins, many players expressed dissatisfaction with the allocation of rewards. Players who had dedicated significant time to the game found themselves receiving fewer tokens than expected, while others who had not invested as much effort received comparatively higher rewards. This disparity in distribution has raised concerns among the player base regarding the transparency and fairness of the airdrop process.

Community Voices Discontent

The airdrop distribution prompted a wave of complaints on social media platforms, with players like “Crypto with Khan” lamenting the discrepancy between their efforts and rewards. Despite achieving high rankings in the game, some players received fewer tokens than anticipated, leading to frustration and disappointment. The perceived unfairness in token distribution sparked outrage among players who felt that their dedication to the game had been undervalued.

Scrutiny Intensifies Over Catizen’s Airdrop Allocation

Issues in Airdrop Allocation Surface

Beyond individual grievances, Catizen’s airdrop allocation raised broader concerns within the community. Initially promising to allocate 43% of the total token supply to players through airdrops, the development team later disclosed that only 34% would be distributed to players, with the remaining 9% allocated to Binance’s Launchpool. This shift in allocation percentages, coupled with the revelation of two airdrop seasons, caught many players off guard as these details had not been communicated in the project’s whitepaper.

Controversy Deepens Over Reward Criteria

The controversy surrounding Catizen’s airdrop escalated as players noticed a shift in reward criteria favoring financially invested players over dedicated gamers. Master-level players who had not spent money received fewer tokens than Gold-level players who had made financial contributions, leading to accusations of prioritizing monetary gains over rewarding player loyalty. Further criticism arose from the team’s decision to reserve a larger share of the token supply for themselves and the project’s treasury, overshadowing the allocation for the first airdrop season.

The issues surrounding Catizen’s airdrop distribution have raised questions about the project’s transparency and trustworthiness among players, casting a shadow over the fairness of future airdrops.