That’s right, that’s why the users who took on the heaviest burden should be rewarded more, not to mention removing the injustice that Linea Park introduced
3 Likes
i dont think having a threshold of 2000 lxp is great. I personally have more than that , the reason i say this is that it was just gamified engagement. I would encourage looking much more closely at time on chain, protocol usage like lending and trading, for sure holding og projects and nfts too. i would also suugest a hard ceiling on token allocations to whale participants and re distribute the difference to lower tier participants. decentralize everything. lfg.
clear cut parameters would be cool but, then the farmers adjust to the exact strategy to maximize the drop. its good to have rules i get that, the p.o.h and time on chain type metrics are pretty solid , its hard to gamify engagement and i havent seen a perfect airdrop yet i am hopeful that linea comes through!( thanks to all the protocols that have given me coins though in case they are reading this) haha. cheers.
Why, if it is “common”, should it always happen? Who defines the boundaries of this “common”? 99% of L2 solutions are captured by fat VCs and paid KoLs, which often grab at least 15-30% of the entire tokenomics. It is obvious that in this case, in addition to the standard 15% for the 1st distribution, Linea will also have an additional 15%-30% (unused, initially allocated to KoLs and VCs) available, since according to official statements, Linea has no investors. If Linea really loves its community so much, then part of the funds that usually go to investors will go to the community. If L2 is really worth its attention, then it does not need to build its model only around incentives, otherwise it is just a one-time bait that will be milked exactly until the market opportunity costs exceed these rewards. Base is doing great without incentives, without having a token. Because there is a product there and there is really something to do. They do not need additional incentives for the system, they have everything without it. Whose problem is it in the first place? - Marketers who are unable to present the product and win their market share
Let’s face it. How many surviving projects with a bad distribution do you know? Personally, 0. If you offend your community after more than 2 years of waiting, you will die forever in their eyes. Greed has ruined more than one team and more than one project, there are dozens of them. If you don’t want to share, then what’s the point of incentives.
No need to put on a mask and sing something about altruism, organic users and the “power of the community”. People with their liquidity always flow towards the highest income and interest for them on market. If you literally spit in the users’ faces with your “common” 10% on the first distribution, then you will not be able to get them back. User base in 2k25 is quite sensitive and flexible regarding the attitude towards them. If in 2021 there were barely several projects and tokens which you could believe in despite market conditions and team decisions, nowadays you have thousands of projects building 24/7. Betray your loyal community and you won’t be forgiven, who on Earth will spend his/her time on trying to catch “incentives” from the team which previously betrayed you ? How can you convinve somebody to stay on you chain and work for rewards when you actually failed on him on the 1st distribution, after 2 years+ of waiting. The person with healthy mind won’t stay on such chain any longer, there are tons of generous and community-based alternatives on market to have fun on.
All the problems of projects rest on their greed. History has shown repeatedly that user loyalty and real live interest remain only with those projects that prefer generosity to greed.
2 Likes