LXP distribution is a very subtle thing that needs a lot of thought, if you don’t reward the real community in the right ways, most of the rewards will go to sybils with thousands of accounts.
The number of LXP a wallet has represents that person’s commitment to the project.
This needs to be taken into account in the tier system. People with too many LXP should not be seen as a minority and pushed aside.
There should not be a maximum reward in Airdrop.LXP represents commitment and continuity.limiting it will only make sybils with thousands of accounts with low LXP per wallet happy.The reward interval between tiers should be high so that the efforts of sybils/farmers with thousands of wallets are completely wasted. If the reward interval is too short, these people will have hundreds of times more rewards than users who put maximum effort because they have thousands of wallets.
By the way, the team was saying that the LXP was much more valuable than the LXP-L. I hope they haven’t changed their minds.
Note:The team had said that if tesnet nft’s were stacked, equal lxp would be earned for each nft, provided they were the same level. trusting this, many users stacked nft’s and suffered tens of thousands of dollars in losses(It’s not about being whale or sybil. It’s about taking the team at their word.). they were misinformed and found that buying nft’s penalized them. please don’t destroy the people who trusted the project.so someone with 50 Alpha nft’s and someone holding 5 nft’s got the same lxp.the problem here is that each of these nft’s represents one person and should have transferred the right to the person they sold it to.the team ignored this.i hope they don’t ignore this suggestion.
Please do not make the same mistake with the Lxp distribution.
It’s time to see the minority who really trust the project. We trust you Linea Team!
As the tier ranking increases, the number of users in that tier decreases considerably, so it is nothing but selfishness to be jealous of people with high lxp and to suggest that they receive low rewards.
I wonder why the difference between 4k and 5k is 2 points, while the difference between 7k and 8k is 10 points. Then it’s 15 and again 10, for 10k and 11k respectively. When you propose any idea back it up with formulas, not numbers taken from your head that are convenient for your accumulated LXP
This is just a simple ranking. I have already made my point.lol.why should having a good lxp be a flaw.btw i am not even top ranked.i am just talking about being fair.The points I give can be increased or decreased, but as the number of lxp increases, the number of people there decreases, so they do not cause a very big change for the airdrop, or even at all.
We are here discussing it without any grounds on justice. We’re here because of decentralisation. If your model has no formula based calculations it makes no sence, since you cannot observe and build any relation or correlation between all groups.
Secondly, the difference between 2k LXP and 12k LXP is 50 times, man. How can we talk about decentralisation and justice when you propose a 50x gap between users ? When low LXP holders get nothing and large LXP holders get everything ? I know you should give more to the best participants, but not 50 times more. The gap must be no more than 10-15 times
Because there are only 77 people at the top mate.why are you being selfish and jealous of those people’s reward.I am not even at that level but I can defend the rights of those people.
please investigate the sybils mate. you don’t want to reward them. this is just a simple table that could be developed to separate the real users from the sybils, but you can propose anything you think is fair.
I’m not against top users, I’m saying that such descrepancy between least and highest tier is bad. We cannot speak about decentralisation, when you have 50x difeerence between users. But it’s not the thing I’m talking about. If you propose any idea, add formulas and your analysis, numbers from your head are either biased or has no logical script/constant sequence.
By fighting sybils you should always remember there are real and genuine users among them, so getting almost nothing for those with 2k and getting everything to those with 12k is not good man, reconsider your proposal
thank you for your time.
But its not just about LXP or LXP-L
if you add up all the campaigns it will be like 4-5 months,
so whats happening on the chain for the rest of the time since mainnet ?
the answer is community projects and onchain activity. cant be fair with this kind of simple solution.
In my opinion it should be tiered with new point system that includes everything. lxp and onchain activity should have the most of the share
Okay it’s fine. Not an issue. If you really want to prioritize those 77 wallets. Just a condition should be applied on those 77 wallets. Claim period will be open for them 1day after lower tier released. So, they can’t dump their heavy bags immediately and they have to hold it. We have seen what happened to ZK. Whales claim period should be open after 24hrs, ascendingly lower to higher tier. Will you agree and not defend anymore. delayed claim period for higher tier.
The levels you’ve set are ridiculous. The ranking should be based on the number of wallets, not the amount of LXP. Therefore, don’t create large discrepancies or unnecessary tiers. I believe the elite should be the first 1,000 wallets, followed by the first 10,000 wallets and so on. You should set a limit for them, like Arbitrum did where their first tier was the first 4,400 wallets, and each of them received $12,500, which is an excellent amount. This is just an airdrop not a plan to secure futures for children and grandchildren overdoing the rewards and divisions will create a problem and cause the same issues that happened with zkSync and Starknet
I see the big gap between tiers, especially some top rank. Could you consider to reduce gap a little bit. Besides that, you can add up some more criteria for user to get eligibility in case they dont have much lxp but they are still active in network.
Agree with your take on this Thirteen and I disagree with the OP.
This would be repeating the exact same mistake that zksync did even worse.
This would shift a massive amount of the supply to an extremely small % of the community.
This would be the polar opposite of decentralization.
This would annihilate positive user sentiment.
Literally less than 25k wallets would walk away with like 90% of the supply or something.
What the actual f?
The table shows like 75k wallets total with even over 5k lxp but the multipliers for the 6k+ groups are bonkers. What so everyone under 5k is just an obvious sybil / multi farmer to you?
Its literally over 90% of the community / users you are saying are sybils according to your tables. Doing this would send it to zero and destroy sentiment swiftly. Your pfp is a bag of money lol, it seems you care about your bags over everyone else including the overall success of the project.
Tiers are bad and people are being greedy. This would be AWFUL for the long term success and sentiment of the project.
I’m not sure what sybils people think this is eliminating - any mass sybils are likely under 1500 or less lxp i would think. I’m not sure how anyone would automate such a vast number of tasks to have more than that. Also if anyone was actually running thousands of bots you would think that final bot filtering should catch that. And lastly if anyone was actually running thousands of bots as the OP implies, the amount of gas they would have spent on main net voyage would have been insane, very few could have or would have afforded or attempted that even if they were some godly masters of automation to have figured out how to do so many tasks with bots. Cutting off users under somewhere between 1k to 2k lxp likely eliminates 99% of bot sybils.
Also I did all the voyages and ended up with barely over 5k lxp.
So I should be toward the bottom of the bin tier?
“As I said, this is a simple suggestion so that real users are not ignored.”
So there are under 25k “real” users then.
Probably not good if a protocol only has under 25k “real” users that would walk away with over 80% to 90% or something of the supply dropped to the community don’t you think?
this is just a simple suggestion mate. real users can be distinguished by in-chain transactions, but you know that the linea park event was seriously manipulated.
It is strange, to put it mildly, what contribution to the development of the ecosystem was made by users who simply bought up the NFT testnet on the market. What is the value and what is the essence of such encouragement?
