Big mistakes on how this was done

Well, I hope these developers don’t mind building apart from having any users, because Starknet just said F U to a lot of people that have bridged and used over time. Refund for gas, is that even part of it as talked about? I participated including before the wallet upgrade which btw, had major issues, and the bridge fees from mainnet were very large. No distribution despite testing almost every protocol over multiple weeks and days and bridging over half a thousand dollars easily.

I wasn’t a huge users of Stark I guess? But I reguarly tested protocols over the years on testnet and mainnet. Kind of hard to be a regular user btw when so little projects were built over the past couple years. The Starkex distribution was also paltry. And the allocation wizard doesn’t even work on address alone, you have to login to that particular Stark ex system.

This distribution will only disinterest people from Starknet use. It’s a big miss in my estimation and a lost opportunity. Starknet had the opportunity to go head to head with ZK Sync and create a narrative of an ultimate L2 race with people arguing over the best tech, which one is truly the end game.

Now, Starknet risks becoming the Betamax. It can have superior tech, but without users what do you have? Developers are taking a risk, even if they received a large allocation. What is the smarter move for them with such a sentiment that Starknet now has? Seeming to cement for itself, despite previous warnings of user dissaproval? There was a sense the token distribution would be improved from the first “leak” go round, but no. This kind of stubborness will not benefit Starknet in the long or short term. Network effects win in the end.