I have thought of a perfect way to eliminate industrialized activities for you. Weight the LXP of wallet addresses before 4844. For wallets after 4844, if LXP < 2000, they will be disqualified, so that the number of airdrop wallet addresses will reach 500,000 +, I think 1 is a good amount. Of course, other means are needed to eliminate industrialized witches.
1 Like
I think this approach is too radical
The most important thing is to cut off farmers and automation, this can be done by other methods. But some of your approach should also be applied: the guys from the voyage laid out their souls and wallets, when the majority simply clicked on the cheapest quests in the park
Hey sorry itâs taken me so long to get back to you.
And thank you, I did actually put a heck of a lot of time into writing all of that, trying to get it all written in a way that was pretty clear and actually somewhat well organized.
To address your specific questions, I may need a bit of clarification.
Q1: âWhat would your opinion be on a lower minimum LXP threshold if there were a multiplier to account for pre-Dencun tasks with higher gas fees?â
A1: I think what you are saying here is, what if the minimum LXP threshold was lower, ie 1000xp, or maybe even less, however there be a bonus of some sort for users that spent gas pre Dencun?
Perhaps this is fine. I guess there are a lot of nuances and ways you could do a minimum and maybe even different minimums depending on what a user participated in.
If a minimum of say 500 was set, that might exclude anyone that only did nft season. I donât see a huge problem with that, but, perhaps this lower sub 1000 lxp area could be one of the only areas where there ARE dramatic effects on lxp.
One possible idea:
-Sub 400 lxp cut regardless. This would still include NFT season participants that did all but a few
-Over 400 but Sub 1000 lxp, reduced to 1/2 effectively, UNLESS, user gained at least 500 during Main net alone.
Options 2:
IMHO personally think sub 1000 should probably be cut regardless. Sub 1000 is pretty relatively low effort really, and theoretically would include the most would be botters.
Exception - again only main net participants with 500+ or if you wanted to be nice, all pre-dencun although main net voyage itself had crazy high gas while the start of park was high still but not as high, iirc was about half.
Then, if you also wanted there to be a bonus to pre-dencun transactions, which I think is totally fair, I would say again put it in the total 10% bonus bin, and assign whatever percentage of the max 10% you wanted to that particular bonus, or make it the only bonus.
If you really wanted to push the bonuses allocation, you could probably go with 15% of the total, but I would definitely not go past 20% at the absolute maximum. I think 10% is safu if you wanted to do bonuses for whatever is chosen, 15% is pushing it a bit, and 20 I think is the absolute max before serious butthurt and fud starts happening from too many affected, and I also think its rather unfair anyway as LXP was already distributed evenly, flat, and was never said it wouldnât be. Any bonuses and rejiggering at all, is technically, kind of not cool as it is really. It SHOULD be totally flat and as is, but some bonuses for certain things is probably fine again so long as the total is kept fairly low to 0 to 10% safu, or 15% to 20 max. The potential bonus that does make the most sense of all probably is pre-dencun gas though and I tend to agree if bonuses are to be applied that is a good one and makes logical sense.
Again just to be clear what I mean about how these bonuses affect the total LXP supply:
IE, if current total LXP supply = 100%, take 90 to 100% and distribute it flat, linear, as is 1 lxp = .9 to 1 lxp.
Then take 0 to 10% and redistribute to certain chosen bonuses.
Or go beyond 10% to an absolute max of 20%, 80% flat linear to all / 20% to chosen bonuses.
Question 2:
âAlso, how does your total airdrop allocation as a %age consider launch FDV?â
Iâm not sure what you are asking exactly here? OH, ok maybe I sort of get what you are asking here.
My calc doesnât account for valuation at all. Its a function only of the total percentage of the token itself. Valuation is not accounted for, and I donât think it should be. If you do it that way and be like, well 5% is a lot guys because FDV=X, I donât think its gonna go well⌠High probability its just gonna dump and stay dumped⌠Because low float is flatly rejected now broadly. Nobody likes it anymore and its reflected in every project that releases only a tiny amount to the community. Perhaps you are already well aware of this and Iâm preaching to the choir. It seems the vast majority of projects that do well, drop a minimum of 10%+ of the total token supply to the community (and I would say to just LXP btw, LXP-L a separate smaller %), and this has actually been steadily increasing, pretty much the higher it is the greater your chance of overall success for some time now. Hyper is of course a shining example and there are others recently who have done 20 to 30% and done amazing. Projects have been rewarded for rewarding the users. And not paying any CEXs was a great move as well really, they are often predatory and just suck funds away from the project and users anyway. Of course this doesnât work out well for projects that donât have demand, but it works out fantastically for ones that do, CEXs have to buy if they want to list and thatâs good for the project and the users both. I think Linea would likely be fine going this route, youâll just have to be very sure the dexs that you list on and the liquidity you provide are very trusted.
Dfox Reply to another user:
âA potential multiplier would need to be for LXP that was earned from mainnet activity when the gas fees were higher to be fair. I donât see how the NFT LXP for testnet or secondary market purchases falls into that without becoming a loophole.â
Definitely a bit of a rabbit hole there, the greater the amount of âbonusesâ that are applied the more it skews the value of the LXP from purchased NFTs. This would be another reason I would say to keep the bonus percentage of the total lxp fairly low. 10% safu. 20% absolute maxu. NFT holders will be butthurt about 20% though Iâm sure on top of already getting shafted from stacking, that was rather uncool objectively. They already got penalized in essence, getting penalized in essence twice would extra suck. Maybe create a âbonusâ criterion to account for NFT holders that had 2 or more nfts and give them something back of the bonus pie to equal it back out just so that at least the extra bonuses arenât further rekting the effective lxp value of their nft purchases beyond the shafting they already took.
Perhaps they were referring to buying NFTs before Park was announced, which, again objectively would have super sucked. Kind of iffy whether its appropriate to do anything there I guess, again if anything, it could be put in the bonus bin and a percentage applied.
User 1505âs concerns
This is why I think 0 to 10% for all bonuses of the total LXP pie is appropriate - bonuses will exist but smol enough that users arenât turbo butthurt about one thing or another.
As for their min 2k lxp comment, I think its the maximum # that is fair for a cutoff, but within reason. Personally think 1k to 2k is a reasonable cutoff, maybe 1500 is fair, and there be an exception for users who participated in main net, their cutoff be 500 or 1000 respectively maybe.
And a bonus to pre-dencun gas is again I think fair and logical, but keep it 0 to 15% of the total lxp pie max to avoid too much late comer crying.
On the flip side there is cutoff crying for those that donât qualify, 1k to 1500 seems very reasonable to me, main net voyagers exception of 500+, and if you really want to be super nice, maybe cutoff 400 but under 1k/1.5k/2k = get slashed by 1/4 to 1/2 unless 500+ from main net.
Seia
"Linear distribution of rewards is not a good idea in my opinion.
The most engaged people (psychotic lxp hodlers as Chris called them;)) should be properly, well rewarded.
During the linear drop, sybil farms with an average amount of lxp where the campaign did not need to be polished will feel goodâŚ"
-NO. This is the thinking that will ruin everything. Favor 1% of your users and sacrifice the other 99%. Oh and donât forget to assume and call them all sybil when you do. Great idea. Better hurry up and identify those 20k ârealâ users that will power the entire chain in the future right? Yeah⌠Didnât someone do that recently? Seems like they did, canât put my finger on itâŚ
Why not say f*** everyone but frogs? Because thatâs how you put the final nail in the coffin is listening to s### like this.
Quark
âYou should also consider that a significant portion of Linea Park activities occurred before the update, and many users utilized Linea for their own purposes prior to 4844 without participating in specific programs. Therefore, it would be more reasonable to introduce a multiplier not just for LXP earned before the update, but a general multiplier applied if, for example, a user has completed at least 10 transactions before the implementation of the Dencun update.â
This is a tough caveat and kind of valid, I would say you could most easily address this in the âbonusâ 0 to 20% bin. Assign a percentage to this and apply it to ALL transactions, voyage or otherwise pre-dencun. This would be the single bonus that accounts for chain usage outside of the voyages and pre-dencum definitely makes the most sense here to count. Still this bonus can be applied only to voyagers who qualify with the chosen mimimum lxp amount overall for participating in the voyages as well.
Kanenz
âLinea distribution for lxp makes no senseâ
âSo ,
1.there should be tired system for lxp.â
No. What makes no sense is NOT making it linear. What DOES make sense IS linear, as it has already been distributed fairly. There are very few that want these tiers and its these high horse elitists, I think the team is probably well aware of that though and smarter. Doing this = doom. Its really that simple. Again this is favoring the 1% over the 99%. Iâm sure that 1% that wants all the lxp to themselves will power the entire chain totally on their own later. Yup. Worked out great for zk right? I wonder why Hyper didnât do a mega tier system to only favor those with the most points? I mean clearly they are the only ones that werenât sybils right? âŚ
Kanenz
â2.There should be a multiplyer for x transactions before the fees was reduced .
3.A minimum lxps should be applied after the multipyer.â
- two: sure, this is fine, donât make it dramatic, this is why I suggest 0 to 10% of the total lxp to all bonuses combined.
- three: sure, this is also fine if a cutoff is what is implied here, multiple examples are outlined above to help consider.
There seem to be a lot of concern about âindustrial sybilsâ, but the team already implemented POH and has been filtering the automated clusters they could find. (Maybe also look for wallets that have zero activity on any chain period since culture szn, those can probably be safely cut as well and might actually be sybils. Zero trx on ANY chain? IE: linea, zk, scroll, arb, op, eth, ftm, avax, poly post Culture SZN? A zero on all chains, any of those out there would be a safe cut too I would say and probably actual industrial.)
Some are always going to slip through but I will say again I do think this would have been difficult in lineaâs case especially. There were hundreds and hundreds of individual tasks, the vast majority having many individual steps to them. Iâm really not familiar with whatever tools may be out there but it just seems kind of ridiculous to me that someone could have mass automated very many of those tasks. Could a human do multiple? Maybe, although I myself spent multiple evenings on a single task that refused to work sometimes, sometimes even multiple evenings for a single task. Culture SZN I would think probably would have been the easiest of all to automate potentially but really the only one. Everything else I think would have been dramatically more difficult for the most part. Some level of a cutoff is probably appropriate but the higher it is the more genuine users will be unfortunately cut out of course. And every real user that is cut is likely to feel bad about their experience and less likely to use the chain in the future.
I have over 5500 LXP but I can still think objectively about what is best for the project overall and retaining users is that. I could say hey, yeah lets do a giant bonus for users over 5k lxp and cutoff everyone under 4k, clearly they are all sybils anyway! But would that objectively be whatâs best for retaining the most users and maximizing the positive sentiment potential of all users the most we can? Of course not. Users over 5500 is a minority, and just us âeliteâ arenât going to power the chain ourselves.
By Dfoxâs first comments it seems the team is pretty aware of this and that is encouraging. There seems to be a better finger on the pulse so to speak for a while now. A low barrier of entry is probably approriate, otherwise, why would someone have even participated in culture szn or park at all? It objectively would feel bad to have done even just those and get totally shafted.
-A <400 cutoff accounts for late comers that only did Culture Szn to still be included.
-The 400+ to X (X = 1000 to 2000 probably appropriate) range could be the ONLY range where significant slashing adjustments are made beyond 20%
-Main net users 500+ immune to slashing effects (or pre dencun if you really want to be nice)
-Another criterion could be created, at least 1 trx on literally any evm compatible chain post culture szn, or be disqualified with option of (X) lxp = immune regardless, or no lxp threshold option hard rule, at least 1 trx on any chain post culture szn or get rekt.
These are very reasonable criterion.
-80 to 100% flat LXP distribution makes the most logical sense imho. 0 to 20% assigned for all possible bonuses, 10% safu, 20% max.
Lastly, another new quick maffs example of bonus options and criterion.
<400 LXP are excluded entirely.
<1k LXP users are qualified but slashed by 1/2
<2k LXP users are qualified but slashed by 1/4 (or 1500)
And also any user that doesnât have at least 1 trx on any evm chain post culture szn is also excluded.
Lets say 15% is now chosen for all bonuses.
Total LXP supply (lets say it is 1 billion again)
1B x 1.15 = 1.15 billion new LXP supply number
85% / 1B of all LXP is distributed 1 to 1 as normal. 1 billion here.
(*Edit: After thinking about it a little more, I donât think cutoff changes this total at all and neither does slash/reduction, just who gets it.)
-the cutoff part is easy, they are simply excluded.
-If a slash / reduction range is chosen, whatever they are reduced by goes instead to all others.
-total remains 85% either way.
15% / 150 million assigned in total to all bonuses.
Bonuses chosen example scenario:
Bonus 1. Pre-Dencun bonus - 6% of the 15% - Counts all gas pre-dencun, voyage or regular chain use, for all qualifying voyagers
Bonus 2. We love the frogs - 1% of the 15% - all efrog holders given this bonus, smol enough overall, but significant to the very few.
Bonus 3. Voyage Maxi - 4% of the 15% - took part in testnet, main net, park, and culture
Bonus 4. Random obscure thing only 5k people did - 0% - just donât lol.
Bonus 5. LXP Maxi - 5k+ LXP - 3% of the 15%
Bonus 6. NFT 2+ holder - x% of the 15% - try to balance this such that they just arenât taking a further hit than they already have.
Bonus 7. NFT pre Park announcement buyer (& holder) - sorry you got shafted hereâs an extra 1%
*Possible bonuses to slashers may apply and is fine if they qualify.
Of course you / the team may think other bonuses may be appropriate, simply adjust percentage or add whatever other bonuses you feel are logical. All bonuses combined = 15% or less of total LXP supply in this example.
5 Likes
Anyone that doesnât like a tired system is definitely running a Sybil farm. Are you telling me that people with let say 30 wallets with 1500 lxps each is better than someone with a single wallet with 8k lxps? No body wants a linea system but only those running a farm. I know the team is smart enough to realize that. If you can check out the chart this is very clear. People with 2k and less occupied around 70% of all the wallets, which actually happened after the gas was reduced. Even though I agree with most of your analysis but a linea system is bad it only rewards farmers. I have read almost all the proposals in the forum, u are the only one that wants this model, of course it will only benefit the farmers.
5 Likes
thatâs why we should set a minimum threshold and use tier system
3 Likes
How many people have 8k? 5500 already put someone in like the top 2%
Ok, I started to reply here but then I thought that 70% number was crazy and I think it is, there was another post where someone provided stats, the moneybag pfp guy that Iâm sure we should probably listen to⌠yeah probably not⌠but anyway if his stats he provided are right, then when I add things up it says basically there are:
1,924,112 wallets with under 2k lxp
939,690 wallets with over 2k lxp.
So, assuming that is accurate, roughly about 30% are under 2k lxp according to these numbers. This was what I thought when I made assumptions previously and said I thought around 2k cutoff was the max that could be argued is somewhat reasonable, I do think itâs a very high bar though. And certainly a HARD cutoff here at 2k would be pretty brutal honestly.
Just saying, oh so much sybil under 2k is not being fair to the real users that are in that group. So everyone under 2k is a sybil automatically by your standard then huh? Everyone that joined late and did park and culture szn are auto sybil. Ok.
Yeah just nuke everyone that did park & culture szn entirely right? Why not. Just f*** em.
Give people tasks for over a year, the tasks themselves running for literally half a year solid combining all the voyages together, and then give them nothing and call them sybils when they join your project half way through or didnât do everything.
Fortunately, I think the team is much smarter than that.
To be fair, I do think it was easier in park and culture and whatever sybils do exist I think the majority of them are from those 2 voyages. POH was open for a long time for those and I did not think that was a good thing. The team did though and they wanted to bring in as many new users as possible. Turning around and crapping on all of those new users and giving them the shaft completely would make no sense at all. The team left POH open on purpose obviously. They did it, and you are saying cut em all anyway. How would those users who joined for park and culture szn feel only to be completely cut at the end? Even my slashes in the example are pretty brutal considering they were never told, hey, that lxp you are putting your time into, yeah, were gonna mess with that and it wonât be worth what you think it is. Really even in my example those ratios of slashing should probably be less for the 1k to 2k group with that in mind if at all. The other bonuses like pre-dencun gas bonus especially will reward those who did all voyages anyway beyond those that only did the last 2, but doesnât just outright shaft them either. Balance, nuance and care is needed.
The example system I outlined above can account for pretty much every concern that everyone has in fair and balanced ways.
<400 hard cut.
400 to 1k slashed by X ratio (ie 1/2)
1k to 1.5k/2k slashed by X ratio (ie 1/4, 1/8 or not at all)
Exception: user with X lxp from pre-dencun upgrade immune to slashing. (ie X = 500, or 1k)
Bonus for all pre dencun gas
bonus for high lxp 5k+
etc
Its all there. Hopefully if they hadnât already thought of all of these things it gave the team some good ideas to work with and the way itâs done imho is quite fair. The only âtiersâ that exist in essence are sub 1.5/2k lxp this way and affects roughly 30% of all theoretical users. This is sort of making a tier system without making a tier system for the majority of users, which is how it should be, but addresses concerns of the fabled absolutely cracked giga sybil operating on energy drinks and cigarettes exclusively that somehow apparently farmed 30 wallets during park & culture szn. Also note that in my bonus system, these sub 2k lxp users are unlikely to get any of those bonuses. They will for the most part only apply to the untiered 70% majority, and be a max of 15% of the total lxp supply so that it doesnât mess with the linear distribution too much.
1 Like
Total wallets holding lxps is 1,297,221
The statistics you provided is not correct, I believe when you check the real one you will agree with me.
About 70% are actually under 2k lxps NOT 30%, ONLY about 480k wallet have 2k and above.
I never said that people under 2k are Sybil, thatâs impossible, looking at the graph you can clearly see that if a linea distribution is employed, most of the rewards will go to the farmers while those that put in efforts and spent a lot of gas fee will receive little rewards compared to the farmers. But a simple balanced tired system will reward everyone base on their hard work. This is the only fair way. Or can you point where I said people with less than 2k are Sybils?
I think 2000 is too harsh, it should be around 1500lxp and even those people should still be given an opportunity to qualify through bonus points. So even if someone has let say 1500, and the person uses the chain, the person will still qualify from a booster booster points, OR place people with those points and below in a different tire, this way everyone is rewarded irrespective of the amount of lxps you have(I think this is why the solana ecosystem is very successful, as long as you complete POH irrespective of the lxp you have you should be rewarded) but rewarded base on your hard work and contributions, it all depends on the team. This is just my option, I believe the team will make the best decision.
@dfox
8 Likes
OMG a lot of work ! thx
1 Like
The success of an airdrop lies in fair distribution. So, what constitutes fair distribution? I believe it means allocating tokens according to what users with different LXP scores deserve, rather than favoring a specific group.
In your distribution approach, sacrificing both low- and high-score users to benefit mid-score users is inherently unfair. A reasonable distribution should follow certain principles and psychological logic. The biggest flaw lies in penalizing high-score usersâthis is hard to justify.
According to your logic, sacrificing them is acceptable because their numbers are small. But why not simply give them the amount they deserve? After all, they are so few that the impact would be minimal, wouldnât it?
5 Likes
I see you are correct regarding the majority being below 2k. I was misinterpreting the other table that I saw as it was kind of easy to do so but I have now seen other dashboards.
The dune dashboard by rustam4ick is much easier to read.
Total wallets = around 1.3 million.
Users with 0 to 1k = 250k
Users with 1k to 2k = 562k
Sub 2k approx 800k addresses of 1.3mil
Hmm. Well, this is an enormous number and the greater portion.
In your statements above as I re read them you were using 1500 as an example I see for theoretical assumptions that there are vastly more sybils then actual users apparently, not 2k, but really not a great deal of difference there.
This is a dangerous assumption though imho as you canât simply say that 70% of the users are sybils or lumped in with mostly sybils and screw them over completely. Would it affect your or I? No. Should we still care? Yes because the long term success of the project matters.
Again to be fair, the total number of wallets before park / culture iirc was something like 500k, maybe max of 700k I donât remember exactly but I think it was more like 500k ish. Then it started exploding for park especially as gas started getting cheaper. How many of these are sybils no one will really ever know. But although I know many were human as I saw quite a few people saying they were going to give it a try since gas was lower, Iâm sure there are a lot of sybils as well once gas decreased and made it more viable for them too. We canât just say nuke em all though and I tend to agree with TSZ that we definitely should not penalize high score users, although Iâm not sure where they are getting the idea from that they will be, unless they mean like you that assumed sybils from park & culture with relatively low lxp are in essence taking away from the ogs that were there from testnet / main net. Not entirely an untrue statement as they certainly did. Really park and culture should have never been done and now they are just extra problems to deal with really, but, again we canât just cut everyone under 2k as that would be unfair to the humans that do exist in those sets since we canât go back in time. I think the best solution is for the team to decide a hard cutoff, and slashing tiers under either 1500 or 2k like what I outlined above in my full example with the bonuses and everything above 2k just stay flat except for the bonuses.
If say they implemented my outline above as is, how would you feel then?
under 400 cut completely
400 to 1500 slashed by 1/2
1500 to 2k slashed by 1/4
Plus Bonuses as outlined above, which for you I assume would be multiple; pre-dencun, voyage maxi and 5k+ bonuses at least.
*We/They could also make a rule that says bonuses do not apply unless a user is over 1500 or 2k lxp - this would make it so that the pre-dencun bonus especially only applies to users who participated in multiple voyages, and thus any possible hard botter that only pushed a bunch of transactions with automation would not qualify no matter how much gas they spent, unless they also did at least most of 2 voyages basically. But users who DID do more transactions pre-dencun and also did multiple voyages would highly likely get that bonus.
2 Likes
so true i agree 100%
2 Likes
Personally, aside from the LXP I earned from the NFT testnet, I managed to obtain over 2000 additional LXP through the Culture campaign and all the smaller side campaigns.
Personally, I would emphasize the fight against sybil attacks. For example, I saw an influencer bragging about having 30 wallets and 100,000 LXPâŚ
Yes, he had fees, and yes, he used the blockchain and contributed to its activity and development. Apparently, he completed each campaign manually (quite a bold move).
However, personally, I donât see why he should get more rewards than someone like me, who has only one wallet and completed EVERYTHING, worked hard, researched, and tried to stay as active as possible. I believe, and hope, that I am more valuable to this blockchain than someone like himâŚ
1 Like
Youâre absolutely right mate, some people argue that whichever lxp tier has the most people should get the highest reward, they think thatâs fair, I think thatâs funny, each LXP is very valuable and the ratio between tiers should be high.
3 Likes
Disagree. No, it shouldnât be tiered for the most part. There shouldnât be linear lxp distribution and then all of a sudden there is a massively tiered system. For the lowest amounts is the only feasible area there is logic in it, the lower gas and explosion of wallets toward the end. For everything over somewhere between 1000 to 2k, there should be no tiers. It was all earned. People just want mega tiers to benefit themselves now, and thatâs not right imo.
And TSZ saying âmid tierâ are being favored is not really correct. Nobody is being favored, and nobody should be. If anyone is being favored it would be everyone above 1k to 2k. Which is how it should be. 6k lxp should get 2x as much as 3k lxp. Not 10 times because they are so super special and did 10x as much. No they didnât. Stop it.
1 Like
Without a tired system majority of the rewards goes to people with 2000 lxps and below, while the people that paid massive amounts of gas fee, put effort, spent money to move to the higher position, a linear approach will be very unfair, it only favours majority people who farmed it with multiple wallets
For example the efforts and resources of one wallets to gain 7k lxps is far more that of someone with let say 1.5k in 5 wallets. This is not even something to debate about because when you look at the distribution you can clearly see it. Nobody is asking for a crazy tired system, the team knows the best way to reward each tired base on the distribution of the lxp.
From my observation almost every one agree with this approach because itâs the most fair way, the team can tweak it and make sure it is fair.
@dfox
5 Likes
some wallets must be eliminated if you want to get a good drop.this is true
1 Like
To respond to your statement, observing the distribution of usersâ LXP scores reveals that the number of users decreases exponentially as the scores increase. This is because this group of users completes all tasks, regardless of difficulty or cost, and even invests in Testnet NFTs before the rules are clarified. From the number of participants alone, itâs clear how challenging this is.
Saying that 6,000 LXP should only be worth double that of 3,000 LXP is quite strange. Based on your logic, users could simply focus on tasks with the highest cost-performance ratio and create multiple wallets to maximize their benefits. Donât you think such behavior is very much like what a Sybil would do?
You mentioned that expecting a 10x reward is excessive, and I agree. However, a 2x reward is also unreasonable. A multiplier of 3x or 5x might be more appropriate, but definitely not 2x. If you observe the distribution of LXP scores, youâll realize that linear airdrops are inherently mathematically inconsistent. A tiered system represents a quadratic growth pattern.
If youâre concerned about minor score differences between tiers resulting in significant token allocation disparities, this issue can be resolved by using a quadratic curve for airdrops. By substituting the corresponding LXP scores into a quadratic formula, you can derive the appropriate token allocation for each score.
3 Likes
This is absolutely correct.
Like I said I donât disagree w/ significant modifications below 2k. Its above 2k I have an issue with.
Also to clarify my previous response where I said
âFor everything over somewhere between 1000 to 2k, there should be no tiers.â refers to wherever the team may set a top limit to major modifications, at 0 to 1k or 0 to 2k or whatever they pick. It wasnât intended to say that above 1k no major modifications are appropriate, I think they are as I have outlined verbosely in my example scenarios above.
So all of us replying here pretty much seem to be in agreement that under 2k or so there should be significant modifications, it is above that number that our opinions vary more.
I personally think it should remain mostly flat, and there can be bonuses as I outlined above.
SZN thinks there should be tiers above 2k as well, the highest level 6k+ getting 5x as much as someone with 3k, which I definitely disagree with as that is very dramatic modification and wayyyy too much of a difference. 6k vs 3k was not 5x the effort. One can debate it was a bit more difficult than 2x as hard but certainly it wasnât even 3x as difficult let alone 5x as difficult.
Bonuses I think are more fair and appropriate splitting up about 15% of the total supply to various bonuses, including users above say 5500 lxp, users who spent gas pre-dencun, etc.
It seems we all have fairly clear opinions at this point and we all tend to agree under 2k should be modified significantly. Some of our opinions vary more above that level.
I appreciate all of your input.
2 Likes
The Linea lxp campaign was unique, pioneering and engaging. It was a completely different experience than the usual zk, arbitrum or starknet swaps and trading volume.
All the more reason for tiers to be introduced in the division of the reward.
The most engaged and fighting like lions for every single lxp should be appreciated.
3 Likes