As per this data from dec 2023 users growth is 10 x and TVL went to 10x
And Jan 2025 tvl just 2x and users 3x growth for 3 months
That’s very less contribution compare to last year
I hope team do seprate session if possible for jan 2025 users with 10 percent like 2024 users got
Hoping tvl do 10 x from 400 m to 4 b like last year
People didn’t use tech available from years started using after so many scam coins launched by hayden team speaking about fairness
If team removes all those coins points
contribution of users in 2025 is nothing
It seems this friend started to engage with Meteora more closely after $TRUMP launched on January 18th. Upon careful observation of their statements, one might notice some factual discrepancies and logical inconsistencies, which are perhaps common among airdrop speculators. Moreover, there seem to be quite a few players like them, and they might be the ones expressing the most concerns recently. After observing these comments for the past few days, I can’t help but worry whether they will continue to support Meteora’s development after $MET launches. Will they choose to hold or purchase MET? Personally, I feel that perhaps the 5%+3% allocation might not be the most suitable for these speculators. It would be better to allocate this portion to the true core users—those who have been with Meteora throughout its growth and will continue to support it in the future. They are the truly reliable partners.
In my opinion, adding 2025 users to the fixed 2% reward will dilute the previous users.
So my idea is to reduce the 2025 user allocation by 1% to compensate for the fixed reward, which would be more reasonable.
I propose:
9% allocated to users before 2025.
4% allocated to users from 2025 onwards.
2% allocated fixed based on criteria.
In addition, both this platform and Discord seem to be under attack by bots from sybils in 2025 with very unreasonable criteria with the sole purpose of profiting for themselves.
1)I wish we had more details on the 3% allocation to the stakeholders. What criteria would it be ? Is it about the vault or the pools or it includes DLMM as well ?
I did the 6 months vault for Cloud for instance, I did all DLMM whenever we had a new launch (goatai, pumpai, m3m3). Is this allocation related to these launches? So it would be an allocation available at the TGE as well and across 2024-2025 ? Could make it appear on the screen if it is.
Could we have a bit more info about that?
2)Will we have a criteria like the M3M3 airdrop required 1M points minimum (which was quite reasonable), are we going to have this kind of threshold as well ? Could be another solution to prevent sybils since they would aim logically around 1-5M threshold on each wallet .
I would suggest a matching proportional allocation for 2025 LP stimulus to be distributed at TGE. If TGE is halfway through 2025, the 2025 allocation should be half of the 2024. Linear distribution will kill the token value and engagement in governance. Points system is appropriate if you want to have an engaged community.
Thanks Sara, perfect screenshot of the problem that must be solved. Nobody can LP low quality tokens with that high a win rate without a massive amount of time spent perfecting the trade. period.
The person behind this wallet surely has dozens to hundreds of wallets and are max farming the protocol with different wallets.
This is where Meteora needs to make these types of wallets identify to a discord handle and cluster all of their activities together or the results will be sloppy and reckless with power users impersonating dozens to hundreds of aliases for a massive amount of capture.
This argument completely ignores the fact that users who joined after January 1, 2025, made a huge contribution to the project’s growth by paying 5% to the protocol, effectively funding the entire Meteora ecosystem.
Moreover, there is a logical fallacy in assuming that “early” users will necessarily support the project after TGE, while “late” users will immediately sell. We’ve seen the opposite happen many times: many “early” participants made millions in DLLM pools during the $TRUMP launch, and now they are claiming not only 8% of the allocation but also the majority of the 2%, simply because the time period before the token launch worked in their favor.
In reality, this argument advocates for an unfair transfer of value from new, active participants to those who have already profited immensely.
Thanks to the Team for this thoughtful proposal. It changes some things from the original expectations but I am generally in favor of the direction of those changes and don’t want to quibble over the details.
It also addresses one of the concerns about losing Ben: Top of Funnel. Ben worked tirelessly to help projects think about token issuance technically and in terms of timing. His limited bandwidth required integration partners to help projects travel the last mile (which led to problems), but adding the launchpad/pool incentives makes a lot of sense in this context.
Are you thinking about a vesting schedule for this, or 100% 1yr cliff like the other proposal?
I agree with these adjustments. Increasing the total allocation and separating funds for Launch Pools and Launch Pads ensure a fairer distribution of rewards while protecting early contributors. The transparency in excluding bad actors is also a great move.
The increase in the total allocation from 10% to 15%, with a specific distribution of 3% for Launch Pools and Launch Pads, clearly demonstrates a commitment to fairly rewarding different stakeholders in our ecosystem. This approach ensures that both early contributors and newer participants are recognized for their involvement.
Additionally, the decision to allocate 2% of points based on verifiable on-chain criteria—such as providing liquidity over an extended period or interacting with Meteora between December 2023 and April 2024—is a great way to reward our most dedicated users.
Lastly, excluding Launch Pools and Launch Pads from the initial plan while compensating with a separate 3% allocation is a smart strategy to prevent reward dilution for individual liquidity providers. This measure, combined with efforts to blacklist malicious actors, reinforces our commitment to a transparent and fair community.
Overall, these amendments reflect a deep understanding of our community’s needs and a commitment to fostering sustainable and inclusive growth. I believe these adjustments will have a positive impact on the evolution of our ecosystem.
The proposal is called “amendment to LP Stimulus Plan” of 2024 yet it fails to do so. So far, the more we talk, the more allocation is going to the 2025 users who joined 2 months ago at the expense of 2024 users, overcomplicating everything.
The package was due to 2024, this “bonus” for 2025, I hope it doesn’t exceed 6 months (june 2025) so we don’t end up in a never ending loop.
It’s reasonable to say that without the continuous participation and contributions of users before 2025, it might have been difficult to attract Mr. Trump to issue tokens, or to attract many users like you who joined on January 18th. Does this make sense?
It seems that your logic is somewhat similar to early investors investing in a project at a lower valuation, accompanying the project’s growth, and then when the project becomes a star project, everyone wants to grab a share, and then they start complaining about not being able to enter at the same low valuation as the early investors, claiming it’s unfair.
Perhaps we could take a look at the specific distribution ratios together:
8% for 4-5 months (possibly) in 2025, and 8%+2% for 13 months from 2013-2024.
Isn’t this allocation already quite generous? If you’ve participated in other airdrop events, you’ll find that Meteora has been trying to treat every user as ‘equally’ as possible.
At the beginning, I think a linear approach is fair for everyone, especially for OGs and long-time supporters. However, we should also consider retailers who may not have much capital to hardly earn fees or latecomers. We don’t want to end up with a tiny airdrop. It would disappoint retailers if the project only favors the whales and forgets the small fish. So, making it right is more important than simply making it fair. That’s my thought.
I’ve been reading through all the proposals and every comment, and want to just clarify a few confusion points for the community.
Currently the thing is to offer it all unlock at TGE, but we will know for sure right before TGE when tokenomics numbers are out. Let me know what you think.
The current thinking here is to just apply it to the official launch pool itself. If you provided liquidity in the same pool as CLOUD team did at launch, you will draw from the 3% instead of the 8%.
For these launches, it will be part of the 8% or the regular LP Stimulus Plan.
In general, been consuming a lot of the discussions and reading. There’s a lot of discussions around Linear vs Tier, or extending the fixed allocations.
There will be more info once the final points is ready and we work on the numbers together.
I like the changes regarding this airdrop. The early bird support is great, you did a great job. I think the trough is over, let’s get back to the way things were!
LFGGG METEORA !
