There is a lot of talk and many issues surrounding UXLINK. Let's find out what it was originally intended to do. This is an analysis of @UXLINKofficial's tokenomics, incentives, and sustainability. The total supply of UXLINK is 1 billion tokens, with the community holding 65%, private sales at 21.25%, the team at 8.75%, and the treasury at 5% as of July 2025. The community allocation includes users, builders, partners, and ecosystem revenue distribution, while the private sale is for investors and partners, the team allocation is for founders and contract employees, and the treasury is used as reserve funds for liquidity and operations. Tokens are distributed across Arbitrum One, Mantle, and the TON chain, with most existing on Arbitrum One. A significant portion of the total supply is still vesting, and about 10% has been distributed through the Season 2 airdrop. Unlocking is linked not only to time but also to user growth rates. The value capture structure of the token is multi-layered. UXLINK is used as a gas token integrated across multiple chains, and developers pay service fees for protocol usage and data access in UXLINK. Additionally, there are commission revenues for social interaction DApps within the UXLINK ecosystem, and users can earn UXLINK and UXUY points through social activities, referrals, and participation. Points can be exchanged for NFTs or future airdrops, reinforcing the circulation of the token. The most unique aspect of UXLINK is its dual conditional token issuance mechanism based on time and user growth rates. If the network achieves 100 million users early, tokens will be released sooner, but if growth is slow, unlocking will also be delayed, and if the target is not met, the total supply may never be fully released. This structure is designed to control token inflation and align real network growth with incentives, aiming for long-term sustainability. The reward structure of UXLINK follows a 'Link-to-Earn' model, where users earn UXUY points through invitations or contributions to the ecosystem. These points are not pre-issued but are calculated in real-time on-chain, and users can claim token airdrops through NFT exchanges. The reward formula is designed to gradually decrease as the network scales, similar to Bitcoin's halving mechanism. It also includes an anti-sybil and verification system to prevent bot activity or fraud. The gradually decreasing reward structure and the burning or reallocation policy for inactive accounts contribute to inflation suppression. However, potential risks also exist. If user growth falls short of targets, the adjustment of token circulation may be delayed, leading to dissatisfaction among early investors, and large-scale airdrops or unlocks could create short-term selling pressure. Additionally, despite being a community-centered distribution structure, the high ratio held by investors and the team raises the possibility of centralized control. If rewards are excessively concentrated among users who were active early on, imbalances with new entrants may also occur. UXLINK can be compared to social finance models like FriendTech, Lens, Pacaster, and XCAD Network, and in terms of token inflation suppression and value capture structure, it can also be compared to infrastructure-level platforms like Polygon, Arbitrum, and Base. Key metrics to observe include demand relative to issuance, token staking ratios, burn amounts from gas or fees, and point exchange rates. During 2024, UXLINK's users grew rapidly from 15 million to 40 million, aiming to reach 100 million by the end of 2025. The market capitalization peaked at approximately $367 million by the end of 2024 and stabilized around $100 million by mid-2025. The ecosystem has secured over 300 partners and more than 1.5 million token holders, particularly showing a strong presence in the Asian region. In conclusion, UXLINK's tokenomics presents a unique sustainability model characterized by a community-centered distribution structure, real-use-based value capture, and issuance constraints linked to user growth rates. However, the complex unlocking structure and concentration of investors remain significant challenges for future governance transparency and maintaining market trust.