Ben won’t say this but I will. A lot of the issues with this tge stem from the fact that many users used cambria as the perfect farm for abs points. the abs airdrop was cancelled. so now you have one airdrop forced to deal with the expectations of two. the risk to earn system of cambria is solid and makes sense from first principles. however some users thought of this as play to airdrop system with double dipping and this behavior was the punished by the market. Quoted @cyberpunk: gmgm! some post TGE thoughts, been gathering feedback over the past day and talking to many of yall 1:1, figured I'd summarize some of the learnings. on price action: we dipped significantly below our starting price of $30m FDV. currently around $8M FDV with around ~26% floating. its hard for me to comment on price besides the fact that I of course think we're undervalued. nothing much though we can do here besides deliver on Genesis and our roadmap. on the airdrop: we ended up airdropping 16.25% of total supply to 46,718 wallets. another ~6% of total supply went to presale buyers. presale allocations from the feb 2026 sale were increased by 1.5x. another 1.25% funded RSGP incentives for CEX trading and DEX LP activity. re. the airdrop, 26.6% of the 810M RSGP dropped was sold on DEX, 13.8% was transferred to other addresses, 3% of went back into LP positions, and 56.4% is still held. wallets that started selling within the first hour account for 56% of airdrop sells, within six hours 87%. the 500 biggest sellers account for 72%. how the airdrop worked: there were three buckets - season points (10% of supply), NFT holdings and renown (5%), and the public loot drop (1%). for season points, there were eleven airdrop points seasons that the 10% had to be split between. two of these we'd explicitly promised a fixed allocation (Gold Rush S2 - 3%, First Landing - 1.5%). these ended up being significantly overweight, leaving only 5.5% to split between the remaining 9 seasons (theater of magic - 0.65%, Gold Rush S1 - 0.5%, dungeons - 0.5%, airdrop s1 (base) - 0.125%, airdrop s2 (blast pre-TGE) - 0.3%, airdrop s3 (blast post-TGE) - 0.3%, mando's christmas - 0.125%). within a season, tokens were split pro rata based on points earned in that season. for NFT holdings, 3% of supply was a flat airdrop to NFTs held on the Aug 28th snapshot - 1.9% to Founders (depr), 0.9% to Cores (depr), and 0.2% to islands. 2% of supply went to Renown - a time-holding weighted composite of overall NFT holdings and loyalty. the public loot drop, 1% was split to chests rolled. for this drop, anyone could claim, and the # of chests they got were based on their onchain history score (activity, holdings). how season bucket splits (outside the fixed / promised allocations) were decided: a combination of factors, including - effective fees paid ($), how early the season was, how many participants, subjective factors like impact on cambria growth, etc. how the Airdrop Recipient Profile (ARP) score worked: for each airdrop recipient, we calculated a score that affected how raw season points converted to actual token allocations. this only touched the points (10%) bucket - nfts, loot chests were not affected. this score ranged from 0.4 to 1.25 (1 by default). what raises score: dozens of factors - NFTs held, first founder / loyalty status, net spend, engagement over time, seasons played, charters minted/held, presale participation, cosmetics held, creator scores, etc. etc. what lowers score: player conduct signals (exploit abusing, cheating, botting, sybil activity, wash trading, referral group farming, etc). certain seasons where airdrop point distribution was curved (in an attempt to scale rewards not purely on $ risked and have the average player benefit) were subject to significant sybil activity to exploit this distribution. players who sybilled these seasons were penalized accordingly (but limited only to the points earned in those seasons). nft selling patterns (scaling with share sold, not volume) were also analyzed and contributed to lower scores, as this was considered a factor indicating "farmer" vs "long term participant" skew. transfers between multiple wallets linked were ignored. this factor touched 1,792 accounts with a median cut of 25%. as a group, these players were still paid ~88% of raw, and many were actually above raw with higher starting scores. sales were considered against net buying - nfts held at time of snapshot lowers share sold - net buyers were up. retroactive thoughts: in retrospect, I think we made two mistakes. 1) we should have just increased the total % supply for the airdrop, from 16.25% to 20%. this would have fixed the imbalance between the fixed seasons with already-promised allocations (GR S2, first landing) and the rest. players most affected by this imbalance were the early Duel Arena players on Blast, and Gold Rush Season 3, whose allocation came in under expectations set (but not explicitly promised). 2) we should have just done the airdrop pro rata instead of using the ARP score. there's two conflicting arguments here: A (pro ARP): the ARP score DID end up accurately identifying "farmers" / people that were going to just cash out and dump their tokens. the penalised bands sold 60% of their tokens, the capped band only 11%. out of the 25 largest sellers, 23 had a score below 1, and 23 were marked as players that were linked to a farm / sybil group. NFT holding DID also accurately predict token holding. NFT holders above a score of 1 held 72% of their airdrop, players that held and then sold most of their nfts held 50% of their airdrop, while points-only recipients held only 38%. players that ONLY held NFTs and never farmed airdrop points held an incredible 90%. B (against ARP): the airdrop goals should not have been "calculate a distribution that scientifically predicts who will hold." given we ran an airdrop campaign, the implicit expectation of players is that they'd be rewarded tokens based on their points. everything that we "fixed" with the distribution (punishing sybils, cheating, exploits, botting, wash trading) was done retroactively instead of just straight up banning these players early on. what we ended up doing over the past few years was create an environment and community culture that harbored these players, with only sporadic enforcement of rules. thus, they have a rational counterpoint that 1) their continued engagement benefited us, 2) that many were forced to engage in these behaviors to remain competitive, 3) that they were not told ahead of time that this could be a consequence, and 4) getting "vibe-filtered" actually led to them selling it all in rage, instead of the other way around. ultimately, the ARP ended up not changing distribution much (~12% of the tokens shifted as a result of ARP) while creating unnecessary FUD, confusion, uncertainty, and division within the community. we also made a timing mistake during launch. to run a final simulation test to ensure no reverts would impair distribution, we queued up / pre-signed a bunch of transactions in our multisig. because all signatures were present, a 3rd party (0x5AF5b3FB44B758c8d998fFeDAFd35a6D5b97E16A via 0x92E92dA7495daCbA7b088899255f3dCf2b41423D) was able to execute the 1st batch of presale distributions, accounting for around 3.5% of the supply. moving forward: at the current moment, i don't think dwelling on these issues too long is a good use of our time - we should be laser focused on shipping genesis and growing the protocol, any more time spent here is massively expensive in terms of opportunity cost. however, I do want to eventually revisit and correct the two biggest imbalances (duel arena / gold rush s3 weighting, and token allocation lost to ARP scores specifically due to nft selling) at some point in the future when there's more value to distribute. this will not be in additional tokens (it's too late for that, tokens are scaling units of value). but more in terms of adjusting for the value of the slashed tokens at time of TGE. our community is something we pride ourselves on, and though the recent airdrop has strained and tested some of those connections, I have no doubt that we will weather this storm. crypto is ugly - there's no question about it - the financial incentives create extremely pvp scenarios sometimes. decisions that we are required to make daily touch assets that people care extremely deeply about, and being even slightly off from perfect can hurt a significant amount of people. we have our fair share of fuckups, so I am endlessly grateful for the continued grace that most of our holders continue to extend to us. what's next: our current priority will be continuing to ship - token utility / roadmap and the launch of genesis testnet -> mainnet. this is the only way we can demonstrate the value of the token and make the vision clear to a bigger segment of traders and market participants. wish us luck!(Historical earnings: For 2026Q2 (period ended 2026-06-30), Cloudflare reported basic and diluted EPS of -0.55, net income of -USD 0.193 billion, and revenue of USD 1.336 billion. Consensus expectations: For the next upcoming period 2026Q3 (event date 2026-11-05), consensus EPS is 0.3431 and consensus revenue is USD 0.738 billion.)