This is unfair. Ben Chow has already stated that a tiering system would be used for allocation, but you have hidden the most critical change.
1 Like
3 Likes
in general a good proposal, i like the idea of fixed supply as well as the separate allocations. that makes absolutely sense.
but i would overthink the allocation %.
take one of the recent and most successful token launches HYPE as example.
both protocols have a great product with a vibrant community and supporters.
so thats a good foundation for MET.
but one important aspect of HYPEs success was the big allocation of 31% to early users at tge.
-
this will give most of the supply to loyal and organic users of your product that are likely the highest longterm aligned with the overall success of the ecosystem.
-
will erase the problem of low float/ high fdv. for longterm success launching with a slightly higher float is beneficial not only for price action but also sustainability.
HYPE was truly a masterclass not only in launching the token, but also building a strong, active and alligned community.
so why not use this as a rough blueprint
1 Like
We know that a significant amount of fees will be generated in 2025, and many new users will also come from 2025. In 2024, a linear distribution can be used, which I believe is a fair incentive for early users. However, I’ve noticed that many new users in the community are hoping to secure their own benefits.
My suggestion is to implement a tiered distribution for the 2025 portion, ensuring that small and medium-sized LPers receive some rewards—even if they are minimal—rather than being completely left out as they would be under a strictly linear model. Large and super-large LPers might see some reduction in their benefits, but since most of them have also been active players in 2024, their losses wouldn’t be too significant. A fully linear distribution would result in small and medium-sized LPers receiving very little airdrop allocation.
4 Likes
This proposal makes token distribution extremely unfair to all new users who, just like users from 2024, are also risking their money.
Why should an active user who joined after 2025 receive a linear distribution of a smaller portion of tokens compared to a user who used the protocol a few times at an earlier date?
Linear distribution only benefits large farmers, leaving smaller farmers (who are obviously the majority) without any significant rewards.
According to public statistics, the protocol has only 350,000 wallets interacting with it, most of which have used the protocol only once by providing liquidity to a single pool.
In my opinion, a fairer reward distribution would be the previously planned tier system with a multiplier for early users, as it incentivizes all user groups—from the smallest to the largest.
If the main concern with the tier system is that sybil farmers could exploit it, this can be easily addressed by introducing basic criteria that would exclude most sybils from the airdrop. For example:
- Providing liquidity on different days/months/weeks.
- Participating in two or more liquidity pools.
To satisfy the majority of users, it would be enough to divide them into tiers using simple analytics based on earned fees. For example:
- $10–49
- $50–499
- $500–1999
- $2000–9999
- etc.
5 Likes
In addition to my comment, as correctly stated above, the total amount of commissions earned after 2025 SIGNIFICANTLY exceeds those earned before this period.
And this amount will continue to grow up until the TGE, making a linear distribution for all new users increasingly unfair.
I would also like to point out that under current market conditions, being an LP provider has become a much riskier endeavor, and a linear reward distribution system may discourage retail investors from participating in the project.
1 Like
"
- Providing liquidity on different days/months/weeks.
- Participating in two or more liquidity pools.
"
These measures won’t effectively filter out sybil farmers. Professional sybil farmers operate like a job, with each address having numerous small interactions over extended periods, making these defensive measures useless. Meanwhile, legitimate users like myself who occasionally change addresses and make large but infrequent transactions (with fees over thousands of USD) are likely to be incorrectly flagged by these criteria.
Good proposals!
Those who always talk about tiered proposals, I have reason to suspect that they are from the studio. The proposal should filter out the professional farmers in the studio in 2025, who only provide a small amount of lp in a short period of time. The proposal should set a threshold minimum score, such as 10$ or 50$fee and at the same time meet the conditions of providing more than 3 months or 6 months of lp duration, and providing more than 2 or 3 or more different pools. Only by meeting the above multiple conditions can most farmers be filtered out, and then on this basis, start to learn the airdrop tier mode of jup, providing the earliest to the latest duration of lp. If a threshold is set, such as 3/6 months, it will effectively filter out most of the new farmers who joined in 2025.
3 Likes
Those are for example, the main idea is to establish more complex criteria for eligibility for rewards.
For example minimum fee threshold plus activity towards months is a good idea imo.
Good way to support early users!
Excellent proposal ! It’s fair, linear, early users are properly rewarded. New users get something as well. Very happy.
I’m still wondering what the FDV would be tho without VC’s.
Was thinking, the discord different roles could be rewarded, with maybe like a 0.25% allocation (pondered based on the role) for everyone from 2023 to now ?
About OG: Before April 2024, I bet that many people will say there is something fishy going on. The real OG should be related to the time of accompanying the project. It is recommended to add daily active, weekly active, and monthly active dimensions. About linearity: I advocate tiered distribution, which is beneficial to most people. You should know that there are easy-to-get fees, such as during the Trapp period, and there are also difficult fees, so if it is linear, retail investors will have a very bad impression.
Amendment #1
After hearing community concerns revolving around:
- Linear Airdrop being too whale heavy
- New users in 2025 being too negatively impacted
We propose the following changes
- Expand the 2% Flat airdrop to have qualifying criteria across 2024 and 2025. Example: 6 months liquidity provider across August till March.
- Evaluate with the community again after the points data is ready, to discuss how to distribute $MET to point holders.
3 Likes
I still think it would be better to have a linear standard for 8% in 2024 and a tiered standard for 5% in 2025. 2% is distributed to all users who meet the standard.
4 Likes
Good proposals.I think this plan is good and takes care of most people
1 Like
Agreed, I think it’s a good proposal. I would also like to suggest one of the criteria to prevent sybils, which is to include timeframe based reward for each unique wallet:
- Short term LPer (< 7 days)
- Mid term LPer ( > 90 days < 240 days)
- Long term LPer ( > 270 days)
3 Likes
A tier system for the period from 2025 onwards is absolutely necessary due to the unknown TGE date and the continuously increasing amount of earned fees daily.
Regarding 2024, a linear reward system also makes sense since the amount of earned fees and activity is already fixed and will not grow further.
Overall, this is a good proposal, and I’m glad to see the team listening to the community.
I think going with tiered on both ends could be the best way to go after reading all the above inputs. The disbursement could be made according to the fees collected (in tiers). Then tag on to small portion of bonuses to roles/OG. This could be similar to HYPE’s where there’s like a leaderboard equivalent, and if launched correctly could drive more volume back so that the protocol benefits as well.
Good work.
In the case that we keep adding different criteria, please allow a way to combine wallets.
Example: I started using wallet1 in 2023 and moved to wallet2 at the end of 2024 on a cold wallet for a much higher amount and longer timeframe.
In addition, whether to consider the role of LP Army Private’s CNFT also has a part of the coefficient reward share, which can be regarded as a mark of active participation in community activities, on the basis of the original reward, an additional 20% or so
1 Like