👀 家人們,每天看行情、刷大佬觀點,卻從來不開口說兩句?你的觀點可能比你想的更有價值!
廣場新人 & 回歸福利正式上線!不管你是第一次發帖還是久違回歸,我們都直接送你獎勵!🎁
每月 $20,000 獎金等你來領!
📅 活動時間: 長期有效(月底結算)
💎 參與方式:
用戶需爲首次發帖的新用戶或一個月未發帖的回歸用戶。
發帖時必須帶上話題標籤: #我在广场发首帖 。
內容不限:幣圈新聞、行情分析、曬單吐槽、幣種推薦皆可。
💰 獎勵機制:
必得獎:發帖體驗券
每位有效發帖用戶都可獲得 $50 倉位體驗券。(注:每月獎池上限 $20,000,先到先得!如果大家太熱情,我們會繼續加碼!)
進階獎:發帖雙王爭霸
月度發帖王: 當月發帖數量最多的用戶,額外獎勵 50U。
月度互動王: 當月帖子互動量(點讚+評論+轉發+分享)最高的用戶,額外獎勵 50U。
📝 發帖要求:
帖子字數需 大於30字,拒絕純表情或無意義字符。
內容需積極健康,符合社區規範,嚴禁廣告引流及違規內容。
💡 你的觀點可能會啓發無數人,你的第一次分享也許就是成爲“廣場大V”的起點,現在就開始廣場創作之旅吧!
PoolTogether Case Dismissed, For Now
In late 2020, PoolTogether was sued by Joseph Kent, a software engineer who, at the time, was working as the tech lead for Senator Elizabeth Warren’s presidential campaign.
The lawsuit was filed taking advantage of a New York law that allows buyers of an illegal lottery ticket to file a class-action lawsuit against the issuer of the ticket. According to Kent, PoolTogether’s MO turned into an unlicensed casino and therefore took advantage of its users. However, the judge disagreed with this view of the DeFi project.
Inspired By Bonds, Not Casinos
PoolTogether is a DeFi project built on Optimism, a popular Layer-2 rollup network. The project was inspired by premium financial products available in the U.K. known as premium bonds, or colloquially as “no-loss lotteries.”
When a user chooses to deposit into PoolTogether’s fund, he earns a small chance to receive a daily prize. While this may indeed sound like plain old gambling with extra steps, users who did not win the prize get back all of their funds automatically.
According to PoolTogether’s FAQ, the prize money comes from interest earned on user deposits, which are sent by PoolTogether to larger staking pools in order to collect interest on behalf of PoolTogether users.
Judge Sides With DeFi
Fortunately for fans of the project, Judge Frederic Block agreed with the defense. It was largely funded by a series of Pooly NFTs, which were minted to help fund the case. So far, nearly $2 million have been contributed to PoolTogether’s legal fund in this manner.
Lawyers argued that Kent suffered no losses by depositing his funds in PoolTogether’s fund and accused the software engineer of depositing money for no other reason than to give him the ability to sue.
Judge Block allegedly agreed with this view. Nevertheless, he concurred that PoolTogether’s MO might not be completely in order. However, according to the judge, its legality would be a matter for a state court since, at a federal level, there was no evidence of wrongdoing.
It’s now up to Kent to decide if he will pursue his case locally or let the matter rest.