MoversSomeguy↓416Afi↓374Grethos↓351aadvark↓288Majdi↓263TradeDonald J. Trump↓13.3%Ethos↓2.0%Bold↑1.7%jeff.hl↑1.0%VouchesTucosalamanca943 WHUF → EthosDpuck (bob)50 WHUF → freshout.ape 🍄🦍MMatt25 WHUF → Rahulxero.hlAnton Boiarchuk10 WHUF → Sk0rp.ethReviewsTbeagle ⨀positive · 31 upvotesAnton Boiarchukpositive · 31 upvotesBboatpositive · 20 upvotesRahulxero.hlpositive · 17 upvotes
Profile· Untrusted@EclipseFNDOn Ethos
Eclipse

Eclipse

703 reviews, 26% of them positive.26% positive · 703 reviews· Influence factor 91, above 18% of accounts

The record

From 225 activities · Mar 2026

Eclipse is a Layer 2 blockchain that promised fairness and community-driven development but systematically betrayed supporters through unfair token distribution, poor airdrop execution, and dismissive leadership. Early community members and ASC NFT holders who invested time and money felt farmed and excluded, while the team prioritized insiders and later engaged in bear-posting about their own project. The chain has become a ghost town with minimal adoption, abandoned apps, and widespread reports of scamming behavior, broken promises, and toxic community management.

“Review: How Eclipse Fumbled the $ES Token Launch”The launch of the $ES token by Eclipse was intended to be a pivotal moment in the evolution of their ecosystem, aiming to introduce a new utility and governance mechanism. However, the execution of this launch has been marred by several critical missteps that have significantly undermined its potential impact and community trust. Firstly, the token's immediate post-launch performance was disastrous. Despite high expectations, $ES experienced a staggering 46% drop in value within hours of its debut on major exchanges like Bybit, Kraken, and Bitget. This sharp decline from an opening price of $0.67 to around $0.35 not only eroded investor confidence but also highlighted a lack of market readiness and poor timing in the launch strategy. The rapid devaluation suggested either an overestimation of demand or insufficient liquidity, both of which are fundamental oversights in token economics. Secondly, the airdrop mechanism, while a noble attempt to reward early users and foster community engagement, was poorly managed. The exclusion of employee wallets from the airdrop to prevent insider claims was a positive step, but it failed to address broader issues of fairness and transparency. The airdrop's structure did not adequately account for the diverse contributions of the community, leading to perceptions of inequity. Moreover, the 30-day claim period ending on August 15, 2025, was rushed, potentially alienating users who might have needed more time to engage with the process, especially given the technical barriers some faced during claiming. The tokenomics of $ES also raised eyebrows. With a total supply of 1,000,000,000 tokens, the initial allocation included a significant portion for liquidity and future marketing, which some interpreted as a dilution of value for early supporters. The promise of decentralized governance was undermined by the lack of clear, immediate mechanisms for token holders to influence decisions, leaving many feeling that the governance aspect was more aspirational than practical at this stage. Furthermore, the multi-chain deployment (Eclipse, Ethereum, and Solana) was a bold move but executed without sufficient cross-chain synergy. This led to fragmentation rather than unification, with users on different chains experiencing varied levels of access and utility, which complicated the user experience and diluted the token's perceived value. Eclipse's communication strategy also faltered. The launch was accompanied by a visually engaging video and blog post, but the narrative failed to convincingly address the token's immediate practical benefits and long-term vision. The community was left with more questions than answers, particularly regarding the token's role in the network's operations and its differentiation from other similar projects. In conclusion, Eclipse's launch of $ES was a missed opportunity to solidify its position in the crypto space. The combination of a poorly timed market entry, ineffective airdrop execution, questionable tokenomics, and fragmented multi-chain strategy has left the project struggling to regain momentum. While the underlying technology and community potential remain, the execution of this launch has undoubtedly set Eclipse back, requiring significant effort to rebuild trust and demonstrate tangible value to its users and investors. This fumble serves as a cautionary tale for other projects about the importance of meticulous planning, transparent communication, and community-centric design in token launches.keemnewreign · 1233· 1y ago · negative8
‹ Back384 of 703 · most upvoted firstMore ›