A detailed analysis base on this table with I previously shared with an assumption of 1 billion token to lxp holders
and why the approach is the best, the team can make an adjustment if they find it useful.
Introduction to the Fair Token Distribution Plan
In the evolving landscape of blockchain ecosystems, a fair and transparent token distribution plan is crucial to ensuring long-term community trust and engagement. A well-balanced approach not only rewards participants equitably but also fosters a sense of inclusion and sustainability within the ecosystem. Achieving this balance requires a strategic model that accounts for varying levels of contribution while maintaining fairness across all participant tiers.
This distribution plan leverages a hybrid model, which is the most effective approach for achieving fairness and transparency. The model integrates three key elements: tier-based allocation, proportional distribution within tiers, and gas fee adjustments.
- Tier-Based Allocation: Participants are grouped based on their contribution levels, ensuring structured and organized reward distribution.
- Proportional Distribution Within Tiers: Rewards within each tier are distributed proportionally to better reflect individual efforts without disproportionate advantages.
- Gas Fee Adjustment: Early adopters who faced significantly higher transaction costs are fairly compensated, addressing historical inefficiencies without over-rewarding specific groups.
This model stands out as the most effective because it balances fairness with scalability, rewarding both early supporters and new participants while maintaining an equitable structure. It ensures that all contributors, regardless of their entry point, receive allocations reflective of their efforts, ultimately driving long-term growth and community participation.
By combining structured tiering with proportional allocation and necessary adjustments, this plan sets a new standard for transparent and inclusive token distribution, fostering a healthy and engaged ecosystem.
Topic 1: Designing a Fair Token Distribution for LXP Holders
How should the 1 billion tokens be distributed fairly among LXP holders based on the given table?
Answer:
A tier-based distribution is the most appropriate approach to allocate the tokens fairly while considering the size of each LXP group. Here’s the breakdown:
- Total Tokens Available: 1 billion (1,000,000,000).
- Distribution Plan:
- Tokens are divided into percentage allocations for each LXP tier, ensuring fairness and proportionality based on contributions.
- Higher tiers are rewarded more as their LXP represents greater effort and cost, especially for early participants.
| LXP Tier | Number of Wallets | Share of Tokens (%) | Tokens Allocated |
|---|---|---|---|
< 1,000 |
250,365 | 5% | 50,000,000 |
≥ 1,000 |
562,817 | 15% | 150,000,000 |
≥ 2,000 |
232,091 | 20% | 200,000,000 |
≥ 3,000 |
120,579 | 18% | 180,000,000 |
≥ 4,000 |
77,664 | 15% | 150,000,000 |
≥ 5,000 |
32,906 | 10% | 100,000,000 |
≥ 6,000 |
14,208 | 7% | 70,000,000 |
≥ 7,000 |
5,264 | 6% | 60,000,000 |
≥ 8,000 |
1327 | 4% | 40,000,000 |
> It is worth noting that the community wants a minimum threshold of around 1500lxp to qualify
Reason:
1.Achieving 1,500 LXP is relatively straightforward, even for participants who joined late.
2.Completing the last two voyages or engaging extensively in activities within the Linea Park requires minimal effort, time, and gas fees.
3.It automatically kills 90% of bots accounts
Given this accessibility, the token allocation for this group could be reallocated to bonus pools or other initiatives that the team deems more impactful or aligned with the project’s objectives.
Explanation:
- The largest group (≤ 1,000 LXP holders) receives a modest share because their contribution is relatively low.
- Higher tiers (e.g., ≥ 6,000 LXP) receive progressively larger token rewards to reflect their higher participation and effort.
- This ensures that rewards align with contribution while preventing an excessive concentration of tokens in very few wallets.
Topic 2: Accounting for High Gas Fees for Early Participants
How should early participants with higher gas fees be compensated?
Answer:
Early participants incurred gas fees that were 80x higher than later users, meaning their cost of earning LXP was significantly greater. To address this:
- Adjust Tokens via Multiplier:
For wallets in ≥ 6,000 LXP tiers, a 1.5x multiplier is applied to their token share to compensate for their high transaction costs.
NOTE:THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE, the team can decide to apply this to x number of transactions or lxps before the upgrade
Example Calculation:
-
A wallet in the
≥ 6,000 LXPtier initially receives 70,000,000 tokens (7% of the total). After applying the 1.5x multiplier, their adjusted share becomes:
[
Adjusted\ Tokens = 70,000,000 \times 1.5 = 105,000,000
] -
This adjustment ensures fairness while maintaining proportionality.
Analysis:
- Fairness: Compensating for higher gas fees ensures early participants are not disadvantaged.
- Transparency: A clear multiplier factor prevents arbitrary adjustments.
- Proportionality: The multiplier is applied only to relevant tiers, maintaining the integrity of the overall distribution.
Topic 3: Comparing Linear and Tiered Distribution Approaches
Why is a tier-based distribution better than a linear distribution for LXP holders?
Answer:
A linear distribution directly allocates tokens proportional to LXP values across all wallets. However, this approach has several drawbacks when compared to a tier-based model:
| Aspect | Linear Distribution | Tier-Based Distribution |
|---|---|---|
| Fairness | Rewards base LXP holders excessively while neglecting higher tiers. | Provides balanced rewards across all tiers. |
| Inclusivity | high contributors receive negligible tokens. | Ensures all participants receive meaningful rewards. |
| Gas Fee Adjustment | Does not account for early adopters’ higher costs. | Includes a multiplier for early participants. |
| Incentivization | Favors only large contributors. | Encourages participation across all levels. |
Conclusion:
The tier-based model balances inclusivity, fairness, and proportionality by rewarding all participants based on their contribution tier while acknowledging the efforts of high LXP holders and early adopters.
Topic 4: Ensuring Transparency in Token Distribution
How can the distribution be made transparent and easy to verify?
Answer:
-
Public Smart Contract:
- The distribution should be implemented via a publicly verifiable smart contract, ensuring transparency.
-
Documentation:
- Publish the logic behind tier percentages, multipliers, and final allocations.
- Include a detailed report explaining why certain adjustments were made (e.g., high gas fees).
-
Auditing:
- Engage a third-party auditor to verify the token distribution process.
Analysis:
- Transparency builds trust within the community.
- Verification ensures fairness, especially for early participants and large contributors.
- Automation reduces human error and bias in the allocation process.
KEY TAKEAWAY:
The tier-based token distribution with adjustments for early participants ensures a fair, inclusive, and transparent allocation of the 1 billion tokens. By balancing incentives across tiers and compensating for historical disparities, this approach fosters community trust and long-term participation.
More explanation on the Model
A Hybrid Approach: Linear Within Tiers
Yes, the proposed system can indeed incorporate a hybrid approach where a user’s LXP determines their tier, and within that tier, token allocation is proportional to the LXP held. This combines the fairness of tier-based distribution with the precision of linear allocation. Let’s break it down:
How the Hybrid Model Works:
-
Tier-Based Allocation (Macro-Level):
- The total tokens are first divided into predefined percentages for each tier (as described in the tier table).
- For example, the
≥ 2,000tier receives 20% of the total tokens (200,000,000 tokens out of 1 billion).
-
Linear Distribution Within Tiers (Micro-Level):
- Within each tier, the tokens allocated to that tier are distributed proportionally based on individual LXP scores.
- For instance, if a wallet holds 5% of the total LXP within their tier, they receive 5% of the tokens allocated to that tier.
Example Calculation:
Let’s take the ≥ 2,000 LXP tier as an example:
- Total Tokens for the Tier: 200,000,000
- Total LXP in the Tier: Assume all wallets in this tier collectively hold 10,000,000 LXP.
Another user in the same pool with let say 70,000 lxp will receive 1,400,000
So even tho they are in the same pool they will recieve token linearly based on their LXP
Advantages of the Hybrid Approach:
-
Fairness Across Groups:
- The tier-based system ensures fairness by allocating a set percentage to each tier.
- The linear distribution within tiers rewards users proportionally to their individual contributions.
-
Inclusivity for Small Holders:
- Even users with smaller LXP scores are guaranteed a share based on their tier, but their contribution still matters.
-
Incentivizes High Contribution:
- Larger LXP holders benefit from proportional allocation, motivating who actively engage and earn more LXP.
-
Gas Fee Compensation Factor:
- For early participants, the multiplier adjustment (e.g., 1.5x for higher tiers) can still be applied at the tier level without affecting proportional distribution.
MORE EXPLANATION ON THE MULTIPYERS WITH TOKEN ADJUSTMENTS
using a constant multiplier creates disproportion in the table. Instead, applying a Scaled Proportional Multiplier is the most effective solution to ensure fairness and balance.
Key Eligibility Criteria:
Minimum Requirement:
Only wallets with LXP ≥ 1,500 are eligible for token allocation.
Participants with LXP < 1,500 are not eligible to receive any allocation under this model.
1.5 Multiplier for Early Participants:
If you participated in the ecosystem before the protocol upgrade, a 1.5 multiplier will be applied to your LXP to help you reach the first tier (≥ 1,500), provided it makes you eligible.
Why This Approach Works:
Fairness to Early Participants:
By applying a 1.5 multiplier (or certain x) for participants prior to the protocol upgrade, we ensure that their efforts and contributions are recognized, helping them enter the first tier starting at ≥ 1,500.
Exclusion of Ineligible Wallets:
Excluding wallets with LXP < 1,500 ensures that the allocation is fair and rewards active participants with meaningful contributions to the ecosystem.
Why This Type of Multiplier is Best:
Balances Rewards Across Tiers:
The tier-specific multiplier ensures that higher tiers receive a fair boost for their efforts without creating disproportionate allocations. By applying a 1.04 multiplier to tiers ≥ 2,000, we provide a modest increase that reflects their additional contributions while maintaining fairness across all tiers.
Recognizes Early Contributions:
The 1.5 multiplier for early participants acknowledges those who supported the protocol before the upgrade, helping them qualify for the first tier and ensuring they are not left out despite historical disadvantages like higher gas fees or limited opportunities.
Acknowledged Active Participation:
By emphasizing the ≥ 1,500 minimum requirement and rewarding consistent efforts, this approach motivates participants to engage more actively with the ecosystem rather than relying solely on minimal contributions.
Transparency and Equity:
The inclusion of multipliers in the table provides clear insight into how adjustments are made. It ensures proportionality while avoiding extreme concentration of tokens in higher tiers or overlooking smaller yet meaningful contributors.
Avoids Disproportionality:
Unlike a constant multiplier, which can disproportionately inflate higher-tier allocations, this tier-specific multiplier creates a gradual and controlled reward structure, maintaining balance within the distribution model.
debates around achieving a fair and transparent token distribution.
LXPL distribution
For LXPL, I believe the most appropriate approach is to reward holders linearly, which aligns with the majority’s preference. However, it would be beneficial to set a cap on rewards for top holders while ensuring a decent base allocation (especially those that supplied liquidity for the 6 months) (not overly excessive). Currently, the limited data on LXPL makes it challenging to provide a robust justification for any specific distribution model.
Additionally, I think it would be a good idea to allocate a small portion of tokens to certain communities that have actively contributed to the project’s growth. However, I strongly recommend that this allocation remains separate from LXP.
Why This Model is Recommended:
This hybrid system is the best of both worlds:
- It avoids the excessive concentration of rewards seen in purely linear models.
- It retains the inclusivity and fairness of tier-based distribution.
- It is transparent, as both the tier allocations and proportional calculations can be publicly audited.
In conclusion, the hybrid approach ensures fairness, inclusivity, and precision, making it an ideal solution for token distribution.
@dfox I will like to hear your feedback on this topic.
I also think the team can make adjustments in any area that need adjustment to achieve a fair and transparent allocation for the community
UPDATE on Sybil list
Now that The team has successfully eliminated most of the Sybil accounts (it is worth noting that Sybil can’t be eliminated 100% but we must implement a system where they earn less). With the allowance of up to 20 wallets, the implementation of a tiered system now appears to be essential. Congratulations to the team and Nansen on this achievement.
Thanks to @0xebeggar, I requested the data from @ACHINTAMAJI9 on X
This is why I have consistently emphasized that **90% of wallets below 1,500 LXP are likely SybilsIt is evident that the majority of large-scale farmers, managing 20+ accounts, tend to fall within this range,**while the small farmers with 5+ accounts seat within 2k to 2k, the number of accounts reduced significantly as we move up the tiers highlighting the necessity of setting a minimum LXP threshold.
By comparing the provided tables, it becomes clear that the lowest tier has the highest concentration of Sybil accounts, with the percentage decreasing significantly as we move up the tiers. This pattern strongly supports the argument that the team must avoid the mistake of implementing a linear distribution model.
The data reinforces the importance of adopting a structured and tiered approach structure that minimizes rewards for such accounts(if <1500 lxp is to be considered) . This way, legitimate users are not adversely impacted, while Sybil accounts receive reduced incentives to ensure fairness and prevent exploitation.
> KNOWN ISSUES
LXP OVERAGE
[quote=“mariejane1190, post:1, topic:9230, full:true”]
Wallets accessed through “AdsPower Browser” were compromised, resulting in the loss of crypto assets, which were drained to a hacker’s wallet address.
The official announcement from “AdsPower Browser” identified the hacker’s address as:
0xf772Be79Bd6D1F4316e938C6c40cF68CF6911c81