Recently, a major exchange launched a new feature that has sparked quite a bit of controversy.

The mechanism works like this: points are deducted in a decreasing manner over time, losing one point per minute. Tonight's raid event offers a 60U reward, which requires spending 30 points to claim. From another perspective, it's like having two opportunities per day, each requiring an investment of about 30U. At first glance, the consumption rate seems fast, but the actual monetary input isn't that large.

Some say this is more fair. But where is the fairness reflected? What is the true logic behind this mechanism?

It looks simple on the surface, but in reality, it's a psychological game among participants. You have no idea when others will make their move — will they wait until their points drop to 15? Or 10? No one reveals their hand, and information is completely asymmetric. This uncertainty makes you particularly nervous and unsure, leading you to act prematurely. What happens then? You directly lose 30 points and end up purchasing at the highest price.

Want to wait until your points drop even lower? Difficult. Because you never know when other participants will act, nor can you see the overall score situation. In the end, you can only compete for the airdrop at a cost higher than the average. Each cycle allows at most two participations, and under this design, retail investors are more likely to fall into a passive position.

From a mechanism design perspective, this indeed places retail investors into a carefully crafted game environment.