As someone ranked in the top 500 in LXP, I want to share my frustration with some of the proposals suggesting a linear distribution for upcoming airdrops. I’ve invested significant time, effort, and money to reach this level with a single wallet. Hearing that a linear distribution is considered “fair” feels counterproductive and even harmful to the ecosystem.
The Problem with Sybils and the Pitfall of Linear Distribution
If I had spread my efforts and funds across 10 wallets instead of focusing on just one, I would likely have accumulated around 30,000 LXP in total, compared to the 9,000 LXP I currently have. This means that people who exploit the system using sybil wallets (multiple fraudulent wallets) would be significantly rewarded. And if this becomes the norm, what’s stopping me—or anyone else—from adopting the same approach?
However, what would the blockchain gain from this scenario? Absolutely nothing sustainable:
- Authentic users like me would feel discouraged and eventually abandon the platform.
- Sybil wallets provide no real value to the ecosystem in the long term. These “farmers” only exploit short-term opportunities, often at the expense of the blockchain’s overall health.
Three Possible Scenarios for Distribution
-
Linear distribution (without any multipliers)
- Serious investors and loyal users (e.g., the top 10k) would lose out.
- Result: A mass exodus to other blockchains, leaving the platform dominated by sybil wallets.
-
Linear distribution with multipliers
- This might partially satisfy some engaged users but would create backlash from those who don’t benefit from the multipliers.
-
Tiered distribution with exponential coefficients
- In my opinion, this is the ideal compromise:
- Top investors remain satisfied and loyal.
- Sybils earn less, discouraging excessive exploitation.
- The blockchain retains a strong community, even if it loses around 1/3 of the sybil wallets.
- In my opinion, this is the ideal compromise:
My Ideal Solution: A KYC-Based Airdrop
If the goal is to support smaller users without encouraging sybil exploitation, the best approach would be an airdrop requiring KYC verification:
- Yes, it might feel restrictive.
- But it would ensure that only real users participate.
Even with a linear distribution in this case, I’d be satisfied because:
- The number of eligible participants would be reduced.
- Rewards would go to authentic members, not spammers.
Conclusion
Rewarding sybils weakens the ecosystem in the long term. To strengthen the blockchain and retain its real community, we need:
- A system that rewards authentic efforts.
- An approach that actively discourages exploitative behavior.
A strong blockchain relies on a community of engaged users, not a bloated number of phantom wallets. Let’s make the right decisions to ensure a sustainable future for our ecosystem. 