Jupiter JUP Airdrop: Balanced Proposal for Jupuary 2025

[yovlatka]

oh waw, what about those low on finances but yet struggling to position best they can?

[D3vpurity]

ASR will still continue
Reward for this qtrs will be January 2025

[BGJ]

I am voting for this!

[DazP]

that’s why I said I disagree with these allocations. I will be truly disappointed if JUP team onboard suggestions that benefit multi-wallet farmers.

[miuq]

I think you are misunderstanding the proposal regarding DAO voters, so let me break it down for you.

Person 1 has 100 JUP
Person 2 has 1000 JUP

Person 1 has 1/10 of the voting power compared to person 2. For the sake of making this simple, let’s say they receive 50% as ASR.

They both voted for 10 proposals. After ASR person 1 has 150 JUP and person 2 has 1500 JUP. The voting power relatively speaking stays the same, person 1 still has 1/10 of the voting power compared to person 2. This means that it does not matter how much JUP you have staked, the relative voting power stays the same.

Let’s have another example.

Person 1 voted for 10 proposals and person 2 voted only 5.

After ASR, person 1 has 150 JUP and person 2 has 1250 JUP. So the voting power moves towards those who are voting on more proposals. Again, the amount of JUP staked does not favour bigger voters. ASR favours the more active voters.

Jupuary reward for DAO voters in this proposal has the same model as ASR. It does not favour bigger or smaller voters, it favours voters who have been more active.

When it comes to decentralising the DAO and voting. As jupuary injects 700M JUP to the market and roughly one third of it is expected to flow into DAO staking and voting ( see this post for more details ), the amount of staked JUP increases from 440M to 670M. This means that the current DAO voters have less power than before and thus Jupiter DAO becomes more decentralised.

What do you think, was this helpful?

[miuq]

Please see my previous post on this thread. The big players won’t be receiving anything more than smaller ones. It’s the active voters who are being rewarded more. Did this help understanding the model any better?

[aped]

lets not take this off topic, im afraid might use abnormal words which u wont be familiar with.

[aped]

how come to recognize a person being farmer with that freaking 1000 wallets, dayum thats huge i dont think he can cope up with it, this is were consistency comes into action, transaction between few distinct months will exclude, talking of stakers ive seen 0.1 jup staked to make it unique wallets. so what i mean is you can stop them but anti methods can be utilized to circle those.

i remember last time jupuary1 pretty much few of them claimed the same. just because it was tiered base.

[JUPWhale]

@WTP

I think this proposal is very well thought out, and I appreciate you trying to fairly incorporate all of the feedback received. Truly - it is a herculean task to try to be fair with this, and there will always be people who feel like they deserve more, but I honestly think you’ve done your best, and a great job at that, with this to be fair towards everyone. Well done, friend.

Thank you very much! (:

@WTP

I appreciate you trying to fairly incorporate all of the feedback received. Truly - it is a herculean task to try to be fair with this

Yes it really is, and I appreciate that you can see the effort I’ve made with including all the feedback I received from over 300 comments!

@WTP

Final, mostly minor comments from me:

1. Did you also consider jupSOL holders? I don’t have much of either JLP or jupSOL, but would note that the jupSOL holders support the Jupiter validator, which is also important for the ecosystem.
2. What made you include WEN here? If it is included, I think a strong case could be made for other LFG tokens, including mockJUP.
3. This list may not be exhaustive, but I think LOs are the only missing one, right? I think that should be included, if it was left off intentionally. I would say that is also a “niche” product.

in regards to your points of feedback:

1. Yes but I’ve included jupSOL holders in the New Tokens & New Features Category. JLP IMO plays a much more important role in providing liquidity for Jupiter for the $850 Million pool, enabling Jupiter perps which is a significant revenue source for Jupiter.
2. I included it since it’s one of the more or less official Jupiter tokens and it’s one memecoin. mockJUP on the other hand was a test token for the real JUP which could be claimed for free on a testing page. I am indifferent to wether it’s included or not, I don’t see any issue either way.
3. Liquidity Operators (LO’s) are indeed (still) missing from the list, but I could include them still if anyone provides some good info and reasons as to why and how to include them. There are a few reasons for not having included them so far, mainly the following:

• The fact that these are professional users / partners
• I have limited data and insight into this data or their roles
• I’ve alternatively included the liquidity providers JLP holders
• Therefore I feel they might fall outside of the scope of Jupuary

But if you have any additional information about this or insight into this - please let me know in the comments.

[JUPWhale]

Yes in other words, every JUP staker would get the same percentage wise on their total amount JUP voted.

I don’t know the total amount of votes, but the allocation would be 110,000,000 JUP divided by the total amount of votes, multiplied by the amount of votes of an individual staker.

[miuq]

According to this post, the amount of total votes by end of the year is estimated around 4B. The current number is 3,2B.

[JUPWhale]

@Jupumut as well as @NightOwl and @TabiZzFR and @DazP seem to be missing an important point here, which I’ve made repeatedly in other topics but you may not have yet seen this, so I will post it here.

To be clear: my proposal includes the filtering out of nearly all farmers through deduplication and anti-Syibl strategies.

There is therefore no need to arbitrarily and unfairly exclude many of the legitimate 1,419,121 users.

In fact, it would be a great mistake to exclude so many legitimate users as it would cause a huge amount of negative sentiment among the community as well as negative (social)media attention.

Most of all, it’s unfair and unnecessary to exclude legitimate users.

Jupiter Airdrop Round 2 (2025): Analysis, Discussion & Proposal for Distribution

This is something which has been already replied to over 20+ times. These 2.3 Million wallets are not the final number. This is the number before deduplication. Deduplication still has to be applied by the team, using data and tools the community may not have access to. Meow has made it clear in speaking and in writing that deduplication will be used. The team can use timestamps, browser fingerprints, IP addresses, behavioral analysis, transaction patterns, transfers between wallets and many …

@JUPWhale

This is something which has been already replied to over 20+ times. These 2.3 Million wallets are not the final number. This is the number before deduplication. Deduplication still has to be applied by the team, using data and tools the community may not have access to.

Meow has made it clear in speaking and in writing that deduplication will be used.

@0xSoju

Therefore, de-duplication is not a particular area of concern for us, but will definitely be for future rounds.

The team can use timestamps, browser fingerprints, IP addresses, behavioral analysis, transaction patterns, transfers between wallets and many more deduplication methods to exclude farmers.

It was mentioned 20+ times that the proposal is for adjusted volume, to perform further deduplication and anti-Sybil measures through Blockchain Analysis. Using these tool the team can can easily find clusters of 1,000’s of inorganic bot wallets which can be identified as ‘farming’. It might be more constructive to ask a question about something if it needs to be clarified, rather than falling into repetition, so we don’t keep talking in circles.

@JUPWhale

Adjusted Volume-Based allocations (after deduplication to exclude farmers):

@JUPWhale

Further deduplication may also need to be performed.

@JUPWhale

Further deduplication and anti-Sybil needs to also be applied by the team. That’s why it’s a proposal for adjusted volume-based tiers.

@JUPWhale

Most farming can be eliminated with deduplication through blockchain analysis and through anti-Sybil measures.

Another ~ 11.3 Million low quality spam users / bots and airdrop farmers with less than $100 in total trading volume would also be excluded from the JUP airdrop.

@JUPWhale

Further deduplication and anti-Sybil needs to also be applied by the team. That’s why it’s a proposal for adjusted volume-based tiers.

[JUPWhale]

Yes so 110,000,000 / 3,200,000,000 = 0.034375 JUP airdrop per vote cast.

Or 343 JUP for a staker with 1000 JUP who cast 10 votes = 10000 votes.

(Addition: This is an estimation based on 3.2B total votes and 110M allocation for JUP Stakers. This is part of a non-official community proposal. Any final numbers are pending).

[kclass]

I have been reading the discussions without participating and must say I’m very impressed by the time and effort that must have gone in to this. I’m one if the 1% top stakers and even if i know my total % of total JUP will decrease I’m now more positive towards the drop then previously.

Good job!

[Jazy]

So, if in your opinion, 350M tokens (currently valued at approximately $357 million dollars) isn’t enough for a marketing campaign to attract new users, then I have nothing more to add.

Let me repeat—$350 million for a marketing campaign.

If that’s not sufficient, then perhaps it would be better to consider canceling Jupuary and finding a more efficient way to onboard new users.

[JUPWhale]

This was covered in the initial topic.

@JUPWhale

The potential zeroing of arbitrage volume would also have little effect on the allocations per user. The reason for this is that although there is $124.2 Billion arb volume on the pairs SOL-USDC, USDT-USDC and SOL-USDT alone (source) representing 37.3% of the 333B total volume, most of this volume is likely made by users doing millions of $USD in trading volume at the $1M+ tier 1. At the highest tier, more volume doesn’t further increase ones airdrop allocation as there is no higher tier to reach.

And

@JUPWhale

About high volume (arbitrage) bots, per my proposal they would not get more than 9,045 JUP + 10 JUP for the $10M+ tier. Even if they did $100M or $500M or Billions in volume. That is the reason for making it tiered, and not linear.

@meow wrote the following about the bots in last year airdrop announcement:

@0xSoju

One interesting observation was that stable/xSOL-SOL/bot volume was far higher at the highest levels. For example, the 2 wallets that did >500M in volume were purely arb traffic. While our share of user volume has greatly increased over time, arb bots consisted of a fairly large volume, especially early on in the cycle.

To be clear, there are many kinds of bots, and many of them play an important part in the liquidity ecosystem, so this is an observation to open up the conversation about whether to differentiate between these volumes.

[miuq]

Yes sir.

Stating the obvious here, but for someone reading this, it’s good to keep in mind that the numbers live and we don’t know the snapshot date. Also this is not official jupuary proposal so things may look different.

A fun one to speculate though.

[JUPWhale]

I have already explained the purpose of Jupuary. Marketing is just one of them.

@JUPWhale

It’s a balanced and community-refined distribution proposal which is inclusive and comprehensive, providing sufficient decentralisation and JUP distribution.

The team has been clear about the purpose. The purpose of Jupuary is:

1. Bringing another 2.1 Billion of the 10B JUP token supply into circulation
2. Distributing JUP to the millions of Jupiter users in a decentralised fashion
3. Incentivising (not rewarding) the community to engage more with Jupiter
4. Guerilla marketing method to create huge hype and (social)media attention
5. Aligning with Jupiter’s growth mindset and inclusive community strategy

If you have a problem with JUP Tokenomics and with Jupuary, then why are you a JUP holder? I’ve only seen you criticise, complain and share your entitlement on this forum, in addition to behaving mean to, emotional, aggressive, dismissive of other community members. Meow made it very clear, there is no place for mean people in the Jupiter community. If all you do is just complaining and feeling entitled as a staker, you might as well explore another project which better aligns with your personal values and preferences.

It’s simple. ASR is for JUP Stakers. Jupuary is for community growth.

This post is about how to allocate and distribute 700M JUP to the community.

[JUPWhale]

@kclass

I’m very impressed by the time and effort that must have gone in to this. I’m one if the 1% top stakers

WOW! That’s amazing! Thank you very much for your feedback!

[JUPWhale]

When you had just $20 for example you could have reached $1000 in trading volume with 50 - 100 trades over the last year. There would be an extra bonus for using New Tokens and New Jupiter Features.