Cap Needed on Maximum Airdrop Allocation

Token Design
1

Dear Linea Team,

The community has spoken — please strongly consider setting a hard cap on airdrop allocations at no more than 73,800 $LINEA per wallet.

1000219581
1000219581730×258 17.8 KB

This is the only viable way to avoid the same backlash and imbalance we saw with the zkSync airdrop.

Because even tho the average value and wallets were almost same in Arbitrum and zkSync airdrops, zkSync’s distribution design was flawed.

Arbitrum’s balanced distribution was one of main factors behind the success of their airdrop. So I suggest we learn from zkSync’s mistake and follow what worked for Arbitrum.

Let’s look at the math:

Arbitrum Total Supply: 10B

Linea Total Supply: 72B (7.2x higher)

Max Arbitrum Airdrop Allocation: 10,250 ARB

Suggested Max for Linea (scaled): 10,250 × 7.2 = 73,800 $LINEA

73,800 $LINEA should be the red line.

Anything beyond that risks repeating zkSync’s mistakes.

The max cap ensures that a few wallets don’t get most of the airdrop supply, because that what made zkSync airdrop distribution a failure.

<1500 LXP wallets can still be included — just not equally rewarded like 5k+ LXP holders(I won’t push too hard for this one tho, it’s your choice).

This way, Power users with 6–12 months of long-term onchain activity and 6-figure+ volume still get rewarded with low LXP holdings.

Distribution feels fair across the board, not just optimized for farmers.

This isn’t about excluding anyone, it’s about protecting the integrity of the drop and fairly rewarding all those who genuinely supported the ecosystem early.

Yes my proposal is not very detailed but I just wanted to bring your attention here. It can be improved with community efforts.

More thoughts and community feedback and discussions here:

https:// x(dot)com/0xWhizMiz/status/1950590474491768953

Thank you for listening.

Best regards,

-whiz

3 Likes
2

That’s the most idiotic calculation I’ve ever seen. One person has 200 wallets with 1500 LXP, as shared above!

4 Likes
3

They had no clear/transparent way of measuring one’s contributions to the network and ended up rewarding some people for holding a meme on another chain.

Linea had this transparent mechanism from the very beginning and It’s onchain.

2 Likes
5

That doesn’t mean that every other wallet should be punished for that sybils actions.

Make the threshold 2-3k I don’t care lol. The level of greed and selfishness between farmers is unbelievable.

You guys would throw 300k users out of the bus only get a slightly higher allocation.

Karma catches up very fast, just remember that.

1 Like
6

Another industrial farmer post!
I know why you don’t allow those who put in more effort to receive more rewards.
Because you have hundreds of low LXP wallets. And keeping the gap small seems much more efficient to you.

2 Likes
7

These guys don’t get it. Everyone had enough time to earn enough LXP to reach the highest level, but having a large number of wallets with low LXP required less effort and seemed more profitable, and now they envy the efforts of those who worked hard.
The worst examples are zksync LOL. zksync didn’t even have any criteria. They awarded the top tier to 5,000 people. At the level we could call the top tier in Linea, there are fewer than 1,500 people. There are 77 wallets with 10,000 lxp or more. This guy is completely crazy.

1 Like
8

Hi @ldqnew2025 we are open to comments and discussion, just please remember following rules and be respectful to everyone, thank you

1 Like
9

Linea has always been transparent about the model of rewarding the community from the beginning, so comparing it with the likes of other projects is totally misleading, setting a maximum cap of 73,800 is not good(you can’t just use a blind number you need to deepdive into the overall data), this will affect those with single wallets and reward people with 20 wallets more.

If you want a more comprehensive breakdown on this topic, you can check my profile.

The team has already mentioned a lot of things recommended in the proposal, I believe the team will make the necessary adjustments.

2 Likes
10

I hope linea is also going to reward some of the forum members who have put in their time and effort to write meaningful proposals on the topic

11

“industrial farmer” “Low LXP holder”

Very quick to jump on conclusions, what I suggested is good for linea in long term, I don’t care about my allocation neither I’ll prove myself to anyone. learn some new skills so you don’t have to depend on airdrop allocations. And btw I don’t believe 10k LXP holders should get 100k Linea especially if they have been inactive after LXP campaigns. Now wait and see how this all plays out.

12

As a community member, I just wanted to highlight this concern, not here to argue endlessly. Just remember the mistake zkSync made. Look at the state of their community now. We can’t let that happen with Linea.

To be honest, I trust the Linea team already understands this and will make sure real power users don’t go unnoticed and a few wallets don’t take all the Linea and leave the rest with peanuts. I was just being cautious.

And for the record, it’s funny how the lXPtards are so quick to throw around terms like “industrial farmer” as if I’m relying on airdrop allocations to make it.

13

Thanks for thread. In my opinion:

While some community members advocate for a smaller gap between the minimum and maximum airdrop caps, I respectfully disagree. I believe those of us who actively engage with the ecosystem day and night deserve to be meaningfully rewarded for our contributions.

2 Likes
14

You have no idea what’s going on outside. What you’re defending is entirely in the service of industrial farmers. Here’s a little advice for you. If you don’t know, you don’t have to comment.
If you’re confusing Linea with ZK and Stark, it shows that you’re completely ignorant. Linea had a scoring system that was open to everyone.

Maybe you should develop new skills instead of trying to sell a pointless collection of NFTs you own for 0.15 ether. LOL

15

Same thoughts, different perspectives and approaches.

16

I’ve been here since the beginning, apparently what you guys want is actually beneficial for me too, I just refuse to turn my back on small users.

17

Another cluesless take or you’re just sidelined lmao, they’re the best team on Linea and have the potential become really big not only on Linea but entire web3, as said by the founder of top gaming project on Linea and I believe in that vision. But Why would you care, you would just dump your tokens and leave. lol

18

Hey fellow community members, As I said earlier:

> “Yes, my proposal is not very detailed, I just wanted to bring your attention here. It can be improved with community efforts.”

This wasn’t meant to be a final or perfect framework. It was a starting point meant to spark discussion around avoiding a zkSync-style airdrop disaster and ensuring fairer distribution for real contributors.

I’ve seen the replies, including:

“That’s the most idiotic calculation I’ve ever seen. One person has 200 wallets with 1500 LXP.”

“Linea had transparent, onchain tracking. You can’t compare it to zkSync.”

“You probably hold 100+ low LXP wallets, that’s why you want a cap.”

“Setting a hard limit without full data analysis hurts legit users with one wallet.”

“Those who grind day and night should be rewarded the most.”

I hear you.

This isn’t about punishing high-effort users or lifting up sybil attackers.

What I aimed for was a sustainable reward structure where:

  1. Power users with high volume and long-term activity still win, regardless of exact LXP count.
  2. Lower LXP holders aren’t excluded, but don’t get treated the same as those who went deep
  3. Airdrop expectations stay grounded, avoiding distortions like zkSync where a few wallets walked away with massive bags while the rest got pennies.

The 73,800 $LINEA cap: It was a scaled benchmark from Arbitrum’s model (10,250 max × 7.2 Linea supply ratio). It’s not a “blind” number, it’s a reference point, and yes, it can be refined with actual data.

We all want Linea to thrive and that means designing a distribution model that rewards merit without repeating the mistakes of others.

Thanks to everyone who contributed feedback, even the harsh takes helped move the conversation forward, but I won’t be spending more time on this as I don’t see much interest and feedback and I stated that in my proposal at the beginning “I just wanted to bring your attention here. It can be improved with community efforts.“.

So I’ll likely return when there’s “something meaningful” to contribute or discuss maybe after the Linea TGE or in a few months. Until then, take care and see y’all later. :waving_hand:

19

A low hard cap ≠ fairness

Airdrops aren’t about distributing candy equally.
They are meant to reward deep, long-term contributors.

Imagine a user who:

  • Has been active on Linea for 12+ months

  • Completed thousands of transactions, with consistent 5-figure TVL

  • Participated in testnets, community feedback, and ecosystem building

Should this kind of commitment be rewarded the same as someone who made a few transactional “farming” interactions? That’s not fairness — that’s punishing real supporters.

zkSync failed not because there was no cap — but due to poor weighting

The zkSync airdrop wasn’t rejected due to lack of a limit — it was criticized because:

  • A mismatch between activity and actual airdrop size

  • Little to no weighting for early testers, long-term holders, or actual usage

  • Bot farmers easily claiming large shares

If Linea wants to avoid this, the solution isn’t a “low ceiling,” but a better weighting formula. For example:

  • Higher weight for sustained on-chain activity

  • Tiered rewards based on LXP, contract diversity, volume

  • Apply a smart cap with diminishing returns — not a flat hard limit

Top contributors deserve proportionate recognition

Arbitrum did cap their airdrop at 10,250 ARB, but:

  • They had a longer runway to build test data

  • Their ecosystem and governance had broader exposure

  • And importantly, their cap matched 10B total supply

Linea has 72B total supply — 7.2x larger.
Blindly multiplying the Arbitrum cap is mathematically convenient, but ignores the realities of Linea’s own user base, LXP mechanics, and growth trajectory.

Don’t let anti-farming sentiment hurt real contributors

We all agree botting and gaming the system should be discouraged.
But punishing genuine users who’ve been active for months — or even years — sends the wrong message.

Airdrops are more than giveaways — they are public signals of who a network values.
Linea has a chance to set a better precedent, and that means:

1 Like
20

The main problem with zksynk airdrop was actually the eth balance in wallet

2 Likes
21

Do you have big farm with 1500LXP wallet ?

1 Like