My Idea about criteria of LINEA airdrop

Token Design
41

Convenient. Nobody forced anyone to participate, yet here you are, complaining because those who actually put in the effort are getting rewarded. If you prioritized other things, that’s perfectly fine, but don’t cry about fairness when you willingly chose not to contribute as much.

And let’s be clear, I’m not the one acting as a “judge and decider.” I made a suggestion, and you’re the one throwing tantrums because it doesn’t benefit you. If my destructive influence is simply exposing hypocrisy, then I’ll take that as a compliment.

42

nakedwinnie Please pay attention to this topic. The guy behaves aggressively for no reason and throws fakes like a machine gun.

43

@nakedwinnie, please take note, these people are attacking others simply for making a fair and logical suggestion. They openly admit that numbers and contributions weren’t their priority, yet they can’t seem to digest the simple fact that those who did prioritize and support Linea thoroughly do deserve a reward.
If actually supporting the ecosystem was too much for them, that’s on them,not on those who put in the work.

44

Who is this “they”? are you crazy?
Who did I attack for example? :flushed:
Stop writing fakes

Rewards should be given to everyone, but in different measures. Obviously, those who contributed more deserve a bigger reward. Why do you keep lying?

You’re the one who’s been questioning the role and contribution of different participants on this forum over the past few days. Your motivation is clear - you’re trying to reduce the number of people eligible for the drop by any means necessary, so you can get a bigger share yourself.

It doesn’t take a scientist to put two and two together. Stop doing this and stop spreading negativity in the community. It’s disgusting.

45

Linea has an amazing team of outstanding professionals. They are executing a thoughtful token distribution aligned with Linea’s vision, and I have no doubt about that.

What truly matters is filtering out sybil groups and other abusers as much as possible. That’s where we should focus our efforts.

But your constant attempts to undermine other members of the Linea community are disgraceful and unacceptable.

46

Try discussing things without taking it personally. Either ignore each other or start having constructive objective discussions without the need to attack one another. This forum is a public place for the community, not your playground, act accordingly.

You can each have opinions and discuss ideas without having to agree with each other, in a more polite manner.

1 Like
47

Once again, you’re falsely accusing me for nothing. I haven’t said anything irrational or untrue, I simply responded to messages and addressed the people who started attacking me in groups. If you think anything I said is incorrect, point it out instead of making baseless accusations.

The real problem here is people like you, who twist facts and push an agenda while pretending to be neutral. I made a fair suggestion to counter sybils, introduce an LXP limit for multipliers. Instead of discussing why you disagree or pointing out flaws in my reasoning, you and your group immediately went on the attack. Any neutral person can see who’s really trying to manipulate the discussion. If anyone is spreading negativity here, it’s the ones who can’t handle an honest conversation without resorting to lies and personal attacks.

48

I completely agree that Linea has an amazing team and that filtering out sybils and abusers should be the priority. But suggesting a fair way to do that is not undermining anyone.

What’s actually disgraceful is how a simple suggestion gets met with baseless accusations and coordinated attacks. Instead of discussing the idea logically, people like you immediately jump to false claims and personal insults. If your stance was solid, you wouldn’t need to resort to that.

49

This is just a multi-account of paperlesshash, who got exposed by his own Twitter bio stating he’s a drop-hunting automator. The guy just made a new profile and keeps harassing people on the forum - same style, same tactics.

He’s simply devaluing the contributions of others while pushing his own criteria.

Stop it.

50

Man, by what you’re saying, you’ve devalued the hard work and contributions of many Linea participants, and now you’re imagining “coordinated attacks” and groups of people? Maybe it’s time for you to accept reality. Before you came to the forum, everything was calm and people were discussing ideas.

Stop devaluing the hard work of participants and making up fake stories.

51

How exactly did I devalue anyone’s hard work and contributions? All I did was suggest a way to filter out sybils and ensure genuine supporters get the rewards they deserve. If someone actually contributed, they would have no issue meeting the criteria.

52

You do this with your words and judgments + trying to lobby for criteria and approaches that cut off ordinary participants of the Linea network from distribution.

53

I’m simply making a logical suggestion to help ensure the fairest possible distribution by filtering out sybils and rewarding genuine, long-term supporters of Linea.

If someone put in the effort and actively contributed, they naturally qualify, there’s nothing unfair about that. But if you think ordinary participants should be rewarded the same as those who did significantly more, then you’re the one pushing an unfair narrative.

54

No, I don’t think so, don’t assign words born in your imagination to me. And the concepts of fairness that you use are twisted and distorted to serve your personal interests. They are not fairness by definition.

Now I see that this is an obvious paperlesshash multi-account. There is no point in trying to answer a person who simply uses chatgpt for any answers.

55

Stick to the topic. Every time you people run out of logical arguments, you resort to baseless attacks and empty accusations and when that doesn’t work, you start playing the victim.

If you disagree with my points, counter them with facts instead of making up nonsense about multi-accounts or ChatGPT

56

Alright. Regarding the topic, you came here to introduce an obviously unfair idea that will limit access to bonuses for regular participants in the Linea network without results above average.

Then you went further and created a separate topic with the identical idea - let’s ignore the fact that you’re cluttering up the forum pointlessly.

People started providing you with arguments and facts, which you, of course, refuse to accept. After all, you are the head of the airdrop distribution here :rofl:

I am not even mentioning your previous attacks and attempts to introduce purely sibyl criteria.

There’s no point discussing facts with you because you lie, manipulate, and fabricate. From now on, I’ll just ignore you.

3 Likes
57

Let’s lay out the facts:

  1. Sybil accounts exist, and even after filtering, many are still in the system.
  2. Lower LXP tiers are where most sybils remain, and as far the genuine people are concerned they didn’t put in real effort.
  3. Setting a 4000-4500 LXP cap for multipliers ensures genuine, engaged users get fair rewards while filtering out abusers.

That’s the objective reasoning behind my suggestion. You, on the other hand, are deflecting, misrepresenting my words, and playing the victim when called out. If ignoring me helps you cope with a lack of counterarguments, be my guest. But don’t mistake running away for winning the discussion.

58

lol, all those heated discussions …I am sure LINEA team will figure it out corretly :slight_smile:

59

min 5 points to be eligble and this model is ok!

60

I hadn’t even seen this one before, your Table #1 the most sober and actually logical table I’ve seen yet. (For bonus criterion, to be clear, NOT the math!) Your bonus criterion actually make good sense for mostly onchain footprint like having an ENS, wallet age, having a few Metamask portfolio trx, trx before Dencun, etc. There could be lots of other stuff too like having a balance on another chain (your got a drop on any other chain sort of covers this.) I’ve also suggested similar final anti sybil criterion that are possible such as a few transactions on ANY other chain. Stuff that is super fair and logical. Perhaps they already did that, not sure.

Wallet age might need to get extended a bit at this point lol. But yeah these are actually great and mostly sybil resistant bonuses that make sense vs favoring a specific group. Well done.

I had some suggestions for bonuses as well that I thought made sense such as participated in all 4 voyages, I’m pretty sure the team will be factoring in pre-dencun gas so that seems to be a given.

The one thing I might change here would be the weighting above around 4k, I feel like it should slow down above there otherwise it starts to really compound a lot toward the top as the multiplication builds on itself, making it too much like Zksync at the top.

I also agree that LXP & LXP-L should be separate and I think Declan feels the same. It gets really weird mixing them together.

Frogs will cry about their multiplier not being more, I’ve suggested perhaps make those nfts worth equal to a beta testnet nft, or maybe an alpha if the team really thinks it’s worthwhile / necessary. It probably is otherwise the ironic thing is that they will go from, oh we love linea and support it because we are so altruistic and genuine, to, oh my god linea is so bad for not giving us more! lol. We don’t want that, and we want everyone happy so they should get a bit extra, as should the foxy nft holders probably and maybe a few others but it definitely shouldn’t exceed the testnet nfts imho. Although even that with a system like this could end up giving them really outsized rewards still, maybe like a 500 lxp flat bonus is more appropriate.

Also the critiques of others that “this favors bots” regarding transactions count such as this:

Well, maybe that’s precisely what got all those bots cut!
So now, such criterion is a safer positive representation of network interactions from real users. I think I’m well over 200 trx myself at this point.

The idea of only distribute on a CEX I have to extremely strongly disagree with. That is so anti defi it’s not funny. Fortunately they have already done a stellar and better than expected job with sybil removal so this isn’t as necessary anymore.

Lastly I would add that the extra weighting that all of these additional points would add is excessive.
Think that all bonus criterion possible should not exceed a maximum of 20% total weight of all LXP and that LXP itself should stay “untouched” as 80%+ of the weight as is. (Although I think more like 10% of the total is probably more appropriate.)

Thus all of these “bonus” criterion would in essence add up to totally different numbers relative to the LXP table numbers. Essentially you would take the whole of LXP, times it by 1.2, and take that extra .2, and that is assigned to all of the bonuses while the other original amount is applied to just the LXP scale itself respective to whatever “tiers” the team decided on.
Basically those tiers would remain the same, and a separate 20% that was allocated to all of the bonuses would then be applied. This makes the distribution much more fair for all imho. (Although admittedly I haven’t actually worked out all of this math exactly, it might still be way too high and skew things excessively.)

Otherwise, imagine if we did exactly as proposed, someone who bought a bunch of nfts and also had like 5500lxp from the campaigns, plus qualified for most of these bonuses, the multiplication on top of multiplication would be absolutely insane and they would walk away with 100x someone with say 4k even without any bonuses, or 400x 2k. We should be very careful of this exponential math. Just a few examples of it could leave the majority of everyone very very salty. Some tiering is fine, some bonuses are fine, but we should be careful of exponential math and the disparities it creates.

The lowest qualifier with say 2k LXP vs 10k is already a 5x difference that is perfectly logical and indisputable. Adding a few tiers already creates large disparities even if a maximum of a 4x multiplier tier is applied for say anyone over 5k LXP as the maximum. Now it becomes a 20x difference 2k vs 10k with a 4x multiplier for anyone over 5k which would apply to the 10k holder. This is enough already at 4x and you have a 5x max before even accounting for bonuses. Too much. The exponential / multiplication should stop there, bonuses on top should be a small portion of the entire LXP pool, separate and not multiply the entire amount.

1 Like