There were couple projects which went the linear way and users weren’t happy about it, like at all. I can’t remember the name of it but some project was farmed by Justin Sun with some big dick whale amount of money and he was about to get almost all of the tokens, do you honestly think that he contributed that much in order to get almost all of the tokens? Small users are left behind, and at same time those are the ppl that matter and that will continue to lend (for example) their coins to the following protocol, not Justin Sun. Let’s not forget that crypto is the place to make it, 20% is some tardfi yield. I’m not acting like im greedy or smth but fr, how many times a project went linear it satisfied it’s small users which were the majority of the participants? There has to be some way to make ppl happy and imo that way has to have some nuances from both linear and tiered approach. This is a great discussion btw and I hope together we can come with some solution to such a big problem
Jupiter did a $1billion tiered airdrop for platform users and I assume they will repeat the tiered approach for Jupanuary. An allocation to JUP voters would be a percentage of Jupanuary, so I don’t see the issue with 60% of Jupanuary as tiered and 40% as linear. ASR rewards are linear so whales haven’t split their JUP into many wallets. The whales are also Solana OGs, supported JUP at the beginning and are still staked supporting JUP now and believe in the future of JUP.
Do you think we should punish the people that believe in us and reward sybil because small bags want more than 20% gain on top of the other Jupanuary airdrops?
Regarding Justin Sun, he has been farming airdrops with his ETH and BTC he has been owning for quite some time. In case he’d like to participate in Jupiter with JUP, he would need to buy JUP. If he decides to buy hundreds of millions worth JUP, by all means. The price would sky rocket. So welcome, Justin Sun. You are welcome here.
When it comes to him using his existing ETH/BTC to dilute some airdrops, obv not nice but there are also good examples of airdrops where they manually adjust the let’s say top 10 wallets. That is the solution in case there are some REALLY big whales.
In case of Jupiter, a linear approach would bring the same ROI for everyone. Linear as is may not be the best solution but it would absolutely be better solution than tiered. Simply because we have at least 10-100k sybils on JUP holders.
I think the best solution will be much more complex than simply go linear but let’s see what we’ll get.
I know people are very anti-the teared system, but I think it’s the best way rather than near distribution
From a good utility function spiraling right into a lively discussion, this is so Jupresearch! 
as it should be ! lol how good
Its super easy to find the sybils, hopefully they can do a work around - I like the idea of giving low voters a thank you amount of maybe 100 tokens, similar to the bonus of for all users of JUP on the first airdrop. I do accept the limitations due to the Sybil effort but it’ll really suck for the small fish who genuinely have little to no $$ to purchase a decent voting amount.
Yeah soju has said he’s already onto the sybils. I have 1000% faith they will get them
Ooo that’s good to know! can’t wait to see what the team does for JUP#2
Undetectable sybils could be a larger problem, they vote at different times, no way to track them. Tweet shows memecoin metric boosting, I’m sure there are smart folk who do this for JUP.
Linear solves this
Damn, this is why we can’t have nice things…
Hopefully the team are all over it
This is awesome thank you for providing. Pretty interesting to see where I stand haha
Accurate, simple and well understandable analysis. 
Linear concentrates jup which isn’t decentralising the protocol
Examples of linear distribution by chains:
(BTC)
Over a long period of time, mining rewards are distributed probabilistically based on computational power. More computational power means a higher probability of finding a valid hash and earning rewards.
(ETH)
Rewards increase proportionally with the amount of ETH staked.
(SOL)
Rewards are roughly proportional to the amount of SOL staked.
Top chains distribute mostly linearly, there is not enough of a decentralisation issue for them to lose top chain status, hence it won’t be an issue for JUP.
I don’t think it is very appropriate to compare 1.26 T mcap asset to 1.18 B mcap asset
BTC is been here for some time already, and by some time i mean just enough so the majority of coins to be redistributed multiple times between whales, smaller fish, etc. or in other words - decentralized possibly in the fairest and best way possible. At the beginning tho the picture was not even remotely close to decentralized because of the very few users who were using it. Going linear way and rewarding the whales will only unnecessary extend the path to decentralization
Fair enough, but ETH and SOL are solid examples of linear distribution working in practise. Everyone voting in these DAO votes earned their JUP including whales.
Tiered has given significant % gains to those who game LFG votes and will give JUP to people that gamed the system with undectable sybils hence linear is best. Tiered is best for other allocations i.e. swap, limit order, DVA/VA, bridge, perps usage, community contribution etc.
An example with 1 detectable sybil cluster:
0.1 JUP staked = 10 $ZEUS $8.3
1 JUP staked = 10 $ZEUS $8.3
1 sybil had 0.1 JUP in 19k wallets ($1.7k), he made 190,000 $ZEUS = $158,000
Shows a 19k wallet cluster (frequency) with 0.1 JUP staked in each wallet and made $156k or 93x gain on 1.7k investment.
On a linear model whales do get the exact same ROI than small fish. On linear model there is no higher multiplier for those who hold more JUP. 1 = 1 no matter how many ones you got in your bag.
Just wondering considering your brilliant stats you present around this topic, based on the model used to distribute the last ASR for example, did you see any weaknesses with the formula or criteria used that might have benefitted any sybil clusters???
Interesting, thanks for highlighting