Jupuary Round 2: Conflict of Interest Among JUP Stakers

[JUPWhale]

Thank you for your comments and it makes sense.

Our proposal does not award swap farmers. Swap users does not equal swap farmers. Farming and gaming the system can happen on every one of the products and categories, and has to be filter out as much as possible.

Our proposal filters out ~ 11.3 Million (11,361,557) low quality spam users / bots and airdrop farmers.

Further deduplication and anti-Sybil measures can filter out the rest.

@JUPWhale

@JUPWhale

Applying a minimum volume requirement of $100 would make ~ 3.9M users (source ) instead of 15.25M wallets. This effectively weeds out around ~ 11.3 Million (11,361,557) low quality spam users / bots and airdrop farmers with less than $100 in total trading volume.

Our proposal is a balanced community-refined distribution proposal that is inclusive and comprehensive - providing sufficient decentralisation and distribution.

It includes the broad base of Jupiter users and stakeholders: DAO / JUP Stakers, Community contributors, New Feature Users, Perpetual Traders, JLP holders, $10M+ tier, $1M - $10M tier, $100K - $1M tier, $10K - $100K tier, $1K - $10K tier and $100+ users.

JUP Airdrop Round 2: Addressing Concerns & Proposal for Distribution

Disclaimer The author of this post is not part of the Jupiter team in any way. This is a community proposal and discussion, and the criteria below are not final. The final criteria will come from the team and still have to be voted on by the DAO. Airdrop Distribution Proposal Below you find our JUP Airdrop Distribution Proposal for Jupuary round 2. The proposal has been expanded multiple times to include feedback from community members in the comments. Scroll down for all the data, analys…