If people bring up questions and objections, I’ll keep responding to them. I have the right and the freedom of speech and expression to do so.
When you make accusations like ‘‘you’re spamming’’, you have to back it up with proof, otherwise breaking the CatDat rules:
2. ### Severe Accusations Require ‘Severe’ Evidence
Explanation: Disagreements can happen, but if you’re going to make serious claims, make sure you’ve got the facts to back them up. This rule ensures that we stay fair and focused on truth, not just assumptions or emotions.
Observe Proper FUD Etiquette: Avoid spreading fear, uncertainty, or doubt
Good proposal. However, there can be additional tiers added for the volume such as the $1,000,000 tier one at least which can greatly help for a much more proper distribution. the Poaps also must be included as multipliers for the tiered rankings in every category…
As an Australian who isn’t awake or able to participate when these are available, strongly disagree.
Basically just a timezones and availability game. Not a fan, my guess is everyone who is in the same position of not being able to participate for this reason will not surprisingly disagree.
In my view, POAP NFT holders are highly dedicated participants in the Jupiter ecosystem. I believe there are several options for how to distribute the Jupuary rewards.
Create a tiered system and reward all holders by increasing the reward based on the number of NFTs the user holds. This system, however, has a significant drawback: if a user holds 6, 7, or 8 NFTs, and another user holds 29, 30, or 31, these users would be considered equal in a tiered system, even though the prices of these NFTs differ greatly.
An option to distribute a certain amount in proportion to each NFT (for example, allocating 32 million $JUP for NFT distribution). However, this approach also has a drawback: holders of Series 6 and Series 30 NFTs would receive the same amount, which could leave Series 6 holders dissatisfied since they might have sold their Series 6 NFT and bought hundreds of Series 30 NFTs instead.
The best option, in my opinion, is to allocate the chosen amount for NFT holders (again, for example, 32 million $JUP) and distribute equal amounts to each series (1 million $JUP) and divide it equally among the holders of each series. In this way, every user interested in weekly Planetary Calls would receive a reward, as well as those who showed their trust in the collection and bought NFTs on Tensor. This approach would satisfy both the larger holders who bought Series 6 for 5 SOL and regular users who purchased Series 30 for 0.03 SOL.
I would have to disagree about the idea that you have put up. Although I like the thinking behind rewarding the POAP NFT holders, I highly DISAGREE with the proposition of rewarding people that have NFTs bought after the NFTs have been airdropped.
IMO, the only reasonable solution for awarding the POAP holders is just to airdrop allocation appropriate to number of POAPs held on the time of snapshot that were AIRDROPPED to the users. I would exclude every single POAP that has been bought off the market.
Although I know that most of the ecosystem is not able to watch the Planetary Calls live just because of time zones, I would strongly suggest that, if the POAP will be one of the criteria for the airdrop, we do NOT allocate any JUP from Jupuary to people that bought the POAPs from market.
In my opinion, those who purchased NFTs on Tensor also supported the ecosystem, as they directly gave their SOL to people who followed updates on the Planetary Call and wanted to build their own collection of commemorative NFTs.
I am a normal and a consistent user of jupiter mostly i used the swap feature of the platform, but I disagree of the 10k requirement volume it only favors the whales who can easily reach that requirement but me as a normal user to be honest doubtly not reached that volume because I rarely do large swaps due to the fact that I simply dont have that large amount of money.
If you really value the vast majority of the users, I believe you can came up with an idea that would favor both whales and the low capital real users.
The proposal was solid until the “Swap” section. I agree with having a consistent volume threshold across all features, with any additional volume above that treated as multipliers. Setting such a high volume threshold for swap users, however, risks marginalizing a large portion of Jup Swap users, who rely on this feature the most. Since Swap is the most popular and frequently used feature, I recommend a volume threshold that’s twice that of other features—perhaps $1k for DCA, LO, and perp, and $2k for Swap. This approach would prevent the proposal from disproportionately benefiting whales, preserving opportunities for the average, organic, and genuine supporters of Jup
I really disagree with this, and this kind of point has been made multiple times across different threads (with lots of people seemingly in agreement) as a good way of establishing who the most established and committed users/members of JUP ecosystem are. I (and others) have suggested in prior threads that the JUP team should look at all areas of interaction with the protocol to add multipliers to users behaviour, rewarding real and committed users. This shouldn’t be technically challenging for the wizards behind JUP, and would help to weed out users who will have innevitably come to the ecosystem post Jupuary 1 to try and game subsequent airdrops.
I think the tiered approaches (such as laid out above, which should be tweaked by JUP team) should form a ‘baseline’ with which multipliers can be applied for other behaviour/interactions that the JUP team believe are valuable or additive to the protocol, be it community involvement, planetary calls, staking their JUP from first airdrop, etc. etc. There are lots and lots of things the team can look at to establish this, and given meow’s comments on the recent JUP rally it sounds like they are already mindful of this.
It was confirmed by Meow that the snapshot was 100% certainly on November 2nd 2024.
It doesn’t make any sense to exclude many legitimate users who were on time before the snapshot through organic trading and usage of the Jupiter platform.
Any requirement using time, is intrinsically unfairly excluding many legitimate users.
I agree with this and Meow also confirmed that this will be done in the Townhall yesterday after the 1h20m mark of the call:
That’s not what is meant here. Legitimacy can be defined by many eligibility criteria, but ‘time’ is not an accurate or helpful criterium.
If for example a new power user came from Ethereum to Solana and started massively using Jupiter in September and/or October, using every trading function, perps, and maybe even buying JLP and JUP and staking / voting - these would be excluded using an additional time-based component / if you make some kind of arbitrary and unfair time requirement on top of the existing snap shot data.
The snap shot date of November 2nd functions as the cut of. There is no need for an additional time-based cut off. There are much better metrics to use such as trading volume (swap, perps, limit, DCA) and activity metrics such as transaction count, usage of different Jupiter functions, trading of Jupiter ecosystem tokens (JUP, JLP), DAO participation through staking and voting etc.
The timeframe of Jupuary round #2 is November 2nd 2023 until November 2nd 2024. Those who used Jupiter and met the eligibility requirements should be eligible for the airdrop.
