Do you still not believe that HYPE's third season airdrop is coming? A few days ago, when we discussed the remaining community shares, the debate mainly focused on one thing: should these tokens reward past participation or keep them for purchasing future growth? Now, an article from the Hyperliquid Policy Center provides an additional perspective on this issue On October 19th, HPC submitted its opinion to the US SEC, supporting the Regulation Crypto Assets proposal and proposing five modification suggestions. Among them, airdrops, token trading, and repurchases have been topics we have repeatedly discussed in the past few weeks The significance of this letter is not just to add some imagination space to S3. What it is striving for is: how to continuously reward users for a running network, and how to make these rewards usable and tradable For users, airdrop is an additional asset in their account, but for projects, in addition to deciding how many coins to distribute, they also need to consider what this distribution legally means Should users be treated as having the same relationship as investors who purchase tokens with money because they have used the product in the past? Will connecting to a wallet, signing transactions, or completing sanction screening in order to receive rewards be considered as users paying for tokens in return? These seemingly detailed issues can affect whether the project dares to proceed and how the reward mechanism is designed HPC hopes for regulatory clarity this time: for user rewards that meet the criteria but are not financing transactions, the focus of analysis should be on whether the user has provided identifiable substantive consideration, rather than just when the airdrop will be announced The letter also specifically mentioned that such allocation can be repeated or executed according to the program. This has pushed the discussion from 'first coin issuance' to 'can participants continue to be rewarded after the network runs' This is also where I believe it is related to the discussion of S3- a product cannot only require the first batch of users New markets require traders, new products require early adopters, network security requires participants, and ecological applications also require developers and liquidity. If tokens are responsible for these tasks, community rewards should not be understood as one-time coin marketing But conversely, just because the reward is useful, it cannot be assumed that every round is worth sending. Who to send it to, what to exchange for, how many people will stay after the reward ends, still determines whether this budget is used effectively The SEC's explanation in March this year provided an analysis path for some non consideration airdrops, but it has specific conditions. The use of products that have already occurred before the announcement cannot be directly equated with the purchase of services and completion of designated tasks for the purpose of receiving tokens after the announcement Therefore, the relevant discussion cannot be summarized as' all airdrops do not involve securities laws'. HPC hopes to further clarify these boundaries, including not treating the necessary administrative and compliance steps for receiving tokens directly as user purchases. I think this is very important If a project wants to do user rewards seriously, it needs to know how to arrange the normal product usage, reward distribution, and collection process clearly, instead of relying on market speculation every time But what about after it's sent out? The second suggestion from HPC precisely addresses this issue: clarifying the legal status of secondary market transactions, as well as the platforms and on chain agreements that provide services for these transactions Receiving tokens and having a usable and tradable market are two different things. When discussing PAPER yesterday, we already saw that native tokens, staking benefits, and contract quotes are not the same right. The legal issues here are different, but for ordinary users, there is one thing in common: rewards cannot only be displayed in the account for how many, but also depend on what it can ultimately do So, the airdrop rules and trading rules should have been discussed together. Projects can reward users, allowing them to hold, use, and trade tokens. Only then will tokens have a greater chance of becoming a part of the network, rather than just creating a wave of popularity on the day of collection For HYPE holders, another suggestion in the article is equally straightforward: repurchase We have been discussing how much repurchase funds HYPE can receive from transaction fees and USDC reserve returns. HPC is discussing how this type of repurchase should be understood by regulators Repurchase that is continuously executed according to public rules, fixed parameters, or procedures is not the same way of operation as a centralized entity temporarily deciding when to buy and how much to buy HPC hopes that regulators can further clarify this distinction, which does not mean that the SEC has already recognized a specific repurchase mechanism. At present, the analysis of employee FAQs still has conditions such as network functionality and central control, and FAQs themselves do not have independent legal effect But this suggestion indicates that HPC is not just fighting for space for how tokens are issued, but also for clearer rules on how the network can continue to operate after the tokens are issued Putting these contents together, what I see is a more complete path: the project continues to be built, users receive rewards, tokens form a market, and the protocol operates according to an open mechanism For Hyperliquid, the significance of this path may be longer lasting than a single airdrop Anyway, HPC seems to have added more possibilities for the arrival of airdrops. Hyperliquid is undoubtedly a huge opportunity, and users who persist will also receive huge rewards If you still have doubts, read this article and see how many airdrops appeared in total HYPE Hyperliquid Airdrop