Jupuary Vote Feedback and Proposal

[JUP4LYF]

Final Feedback on the Jupuary Vote

I believe the next airdrop should proceed but with significant modifications to address fairness, system exploitation, and long-term value.

Key Points:

1. Personal Stake & Contributions:

   • I received the max allocation of JUP in January.
   • I have voted on every proposal with an average of over 100K JUP per vote.

2. Concerns Over System Exploitation:

   • Entitled KOLs: Toxic behavior from some KOLs was evident (e.g., in the recent Kook call, they admitting they would dump. Thanks to ChartFu for speaking up against this entitlement in the call).
   • Airdrop Farmers: Since the future airdrops were announced, farmers have exploited the system. Many of the best farmers know how to appear as legitimate users, making it almost impossible to catch them all.

Proposed Adjustments:

1. 50% Burn, 50% Airdrop:

   • Half of the total allocation should be burned to reduce inflation and support the token’s long-term value.
   • The remaining half should be distributed as an airdrop.

2. Prioritize DAO Voters:

   • Split the airdrop into two equal portions:
     • All Accounts Portion: Distributed to all eligible accounts, even if they haven’t participated in the DAO.
     • DAO JUP Portion: Distributed to accounts that have participated in the DAO, based on criteria set by Jupiter.
   • This ensures everyone is rewarded, but those who stake and actively contribute to the ecosystem are prioritized.

3. Encourage Participation:

   • Voting and staking demonstrate real commitment, as they require significant sums of JUP and participation. These actions cannot be faked as easily as farming high volumes with minimal risk.

Benefits of This Approach:

• Reduces inflation and alleviates dumping fears.
• Rewards all users while ensuring DAO voters receive a more favorable allocation.
• Encourages more users to stake and vote, strengthening the ecosystem in the long term.

This balanced approach promotes fairness, combats exploitation, and ensures the token’s sustainability while maintaining community trust.

Edit: It looks like Jup Vote #1 won’t pass, but let’s refocus on what truly matters. Jupuary is about onboarding new users and expanding the ecosystem—not bowing to loud, entitled KOLs. Jupiter is hands down the best protocol in DeFi, offering unparalleled utility that attracted users even before the TGE.

Stop the empty threats about leaving the protocol—if you’re here, it’s because you know Jupiter is unmatched.

[BGJ]

Nice proposal!

But you should not say you got max allocation for first jupuary. Now you’ll be the greedy staker who cares only about his bags. Prepare for angry farmers attacking your thread lmao

[aped]

sorry but im not bother about anything above this thread has but generally this message implies to your standard as well. @BGJ

J4J #3: Jupuary Vote 1

here you go, leeches are often called “bloodsuckers” or “parasites” because of their tendency to latch onto other creatures and feed off their blood. these terms often used to describe someone who’s seen as taking advantage of his resources Someone who takes more than they give, A person who depends on others for support, often without contributing. A similar reference, implying someone who drains others’ resources or energy or goodwill. A bloodsucker is someone who constantly takes from other…

[BGJ]

Both of us have same interest - protect our capital.
I invested in $JUP, you invested in bot farm.

[aped]

bloodsucker is someone who never will be satisfied. even though i dont relate with any of your topic but still we voting next for jup president i want you to nominate, lets vote for the FUTURE, lets push this narrative.

we should pivot jup from decentralized exchange to voters reunion so no need of jupuary only ASR.

[JUP4LYF]

I’m a bit confused by your message, but it seems you’re implying I’m a leech who takes more than I give? If so, you’re definitely mistaken—I’ve contributed a lot to this community and plan to give even more in the coming months.

When you compare this to the typical predatory farmer, it’s clear we’re on opposite ends of the spectrum.

That said, I’m not here for negativity or unfounded assumptions. If you have constructive points to debate, I’m more than open to discussing them.

[JUP4LYF]

I wanted to be transparent, knowing it might draw criticism, especially from angry farmers. I welcome constructive feedback.

I’m not saying stakers should be rewarded simply for staking, but they should be prioritized over farmers. JUP being the #1 protocol with an announced airdrop has led to heavy farming, and the noise comes from those expecting large sums.

Stakers clearly have more skin in the game than farmers creating multiple accounts to exploit volume, and prioritizing genuine contributors is only fair.

[Mbolorman]

@JUP4LYF

Proposed Adjustments:

1. 50% Burn, 50% Airdrop:

• Half of the total allocation should be burned to reduce inflation and support the token’s long-term value.
• The remaining half should be distributed as an airdrop.

@meow has repeated this several time

‘I AM DONE WITH BURNING JUP TOKENS, NO MORE BURNING, NOT A FAN OF BURNING ANYMORE TOKEN…”

Think he couldn’t be more clearer.

[aped]

to be super honest im not on any edge of the spectrum im talking towards power users who defines what jupiter actually is talking of this team made it super clear they will spare no entertainment to any platform abusers., if you are genuinely a organic user that wont bother you plus if you rely just on ASR you will be bias, cuz ur already optimistic have fun.

the whole concept of jupuary is inviting more users to participate in governance and decision making where DAO aligns with which is the true nature of decentralization.

[JUP4LYF]

That’s fair. Maybe just 50% of the proposed 700M with the rest going back to the community pool.

But there was a reason 30% was burned. Supply and demand is real - there’s a reason BNB did so well over years.