Following the dimensions of @ cz-binance's thinking, it is found that this idea essentially aims to address the balance between "excessive issuance of tokens in projects" and subsequent "sustainable development". However, there are actually many possibilities for "exploiting loopholes". Here are some additional optimization suggestions: 1) If the initial unlocking amount is small (10%), it can indeed reduce the risk for early investors, but it may also be manipulated by a small amount of funds in the market, resulting in increased volatility of early token prices, and even the emergence of some shell projects specifically aimed at inflating 10% speculation expectations. It is suggested to increase the initial unlocking amount (20% -30%?), especially by setting a minimum market value requirement to avoid being artificially inflated for chip pouring. The most crucial thing is that early VC capital partners, supply chain partners, exchanges, etc. need to come forward to endorse and make transparent disclosures about team background, code quality, business logic, chip distribution, and other aspects; 2) If unlocking is only required to maintain a certain high price, it may lead to collusion between the team and large investors, directly linking the chip unlocking period with price manipulation, which cannot protect the interests of a wider range of investors. Suggest expanding the observation period, such as 90 days. The most crucial thing is to conduct a transparent "data report" disclosure of the system before unlocking, including monitoring of transaction volume, holding addresses, price volatility, large transactions, etc., to ensure that the synchronous growth of prices and supply is in a healthy state; 3) Simply binding prices and supply cannot truly reflect the value of a project. For example, most MEME coins do not have actual value, and if only maintaining prices is enough, the industry will lose the possibility of value creation and price matching, which will further weaken the discourse power of the industry's technological narrative. Therefore, some value dimensions should also be added to the above data reports, including DAU TVL、 Multiple measurement dimensions that can reflect value, such as developer activity, community growth scale, technology implementation progress, number of ecological partners, project revenue level, etc; 4) The current predicament of tokenomics is related to the imbalance between price and value, but the key issue is the lack of an effective "elimination and clearing mechanism", which has led to the emergence of a large number of money raising projects, and even the projects have become assembly line production. This has failed, and a new one has been rebuilt. This kind of project party dumping garbage without basic supervision and ethical constraints requires organic mechanisms to combat. For example, if a project pledges a portion of USDT in the contract and cannot truly trigger sustained growth conditions for one year, the entire industry will be liquidated and held accountable; Regularly conduct community voting to provide development suggestions and constraints on projects, such as voting for unlocking and team allocation ratios; Regardless of whether the suggestions put forward by CZ can truly be adopted by the industry, and may even face various challenges in the early stages of implementation, it must be said that it is a beneficial industry development path guidance. This exploration, which starts with the design of the tokenomics mechanism and attempts to solve the dilemma of the token economy model, makes people feel as if they have seen the spirit of the pioneers who devoted their efforts to preaching BTC many years ago, Respect！ @ cz_binance @heyibinance The green mountains remain unchanged and will continue to strengthen over time. At a time when the industry is facing various contradictions and difficulties, such whistleblowers and guides are needed.