They hired 200 top KOLs, sold 280 NFTs, and then the project team wrote a lengthy post and a list of KOLs to criticize them. This is ridiculous. Didn't you screen InfoFi KOLs and their genuine followers when you first launched the campaign? Secondly, if the goal of the campaign was to sell products, why not use offline promotional communities instead of the InfoFi rankings? Thirdly, don't you know that InfoFi ranking data can be manipulated? Twitter is currently supporting smaller bloggers, and they just ran into InfoFi's mutual following and commenting practices. If you're advertising based on InfoFi, who else but you will lose money? On the other hand, the quality of bloggers these days is uneven. Few have the "KOL is ambassador" mentality of the past. They don't deeply participate in projects, don't test projects, don't hold project assets, and may not even know the core aspects of the project (because of AI). CryptoDogs rarely advertises, but I've served as an ambassador for numerous projects and conducted in-depth analysis of hundreds. I can analyze with remarkable accuracy which projects will generate traffic, which will ultimately succeed, and which are likely to fail. More importantly, regarding the projects we promote, if it's a coin, we'll buy it; if it's an investment product, we'll invest first; if it's an early-stage project, we'll test it first, sometimes waiting up to a month. Many projects can't wait a month, so if we encounter any problems, we're the ones who test them first for our followers.