After reading the latest response from the founder of Lighter, I want to share some thoughts with everyone.

Regarding this round of witch account cleanup, I understand that many people feel uneasy—suddenly having their hard-earned points reduced can be unsettling for anyone. But after listening carefully to Vlad's explanation, the team used data science methods like cluster detection, quantifying that the team spent several weeks on this process, which was backed by rigorous validation. More importantly, they opened an appeal channel, and currently the number of appeals is far below expectations, indicating that most users actually accept the decision.

This serves as a reminder: before engaging in any trading or activities, you need to understand the underlying risk identification mechanisms. It’s not that the platform is necessarily perfect, but you should clarify—how do they define risk, and how do they protect the rights of genuine participants? This is especially true in the contract market, where liquidation mechanisms, risk models, and other seemingly technical details directly relate to your fund safety.

At the same time, I also notice that Lighter is gradually expanding the types of collateral, starting with stablecoins and only considering native tokens later. This step-by-step approach is actually a prudent practice—avoiding rushing, as risk models need time to adjust. The same applies to your investment strategy: don’t fully leverage just because you see new opportunities; leaving buffer space is the way to survive long-term.

Finally, I want to say that regarding token value accumulation, they emphasize that all participants—users, investors, and the team—are in the same boat, with value pointing to the token rather than equity. This commitment is clear, but how it will be implemented depends on subsequent mechanism design and execution. Don’t go all-in just because of a promising promise; wait for the details before making a judgment.