This has been a very exciting year for Solana. Many of you forget that the network was strained before major upgrades throughout the year.
One man’s “farmer” is another person’s beta tester. Individuals who used DCA, LOs, Perps should be rewarded for using these products in their infancy. These products were at the mercy of the network and oracle issues (especially first half of the year) and were a little painful at times to use. I personally did not use Limit Orders much, but the individuals that continued to stick with this feature are pushing the team for better fill times and experience, these Cats should be rewarded (hopefully LOs are mastered and implemented in Perps to further boost the Jupiverse).
This proposal creates alignment with Jupiter platform users, those who provided the LP capital for the Perps exchange and faithful staker’s that have locked up 33% of the circulating supply to the DAO, with a track-record of of HODLing. Many people miss votes because of the 4 day voting window (roughly 20% of the voting tokens last vote) but stick with it. Active Staking Rewards are not guaranteed returns but provide great support for project.
This plan leaves no Cat left behind and also doesn’t provide too many rewards for people that might be trading between stable coins or obvious bot wash-trading that the team can surely catch, as they have before.
At the last check of the Dashboard, Jupiter makes something like ~$5M per week in income, those who wish to paper hand their tokens will do so at their own peril, just as before.
Nice work. But I also think giving the biggest amounts of airdrop should be to those using the products in 2024 who have not received any airdrop. The first round was very big.
The argument which you are using could be still used for niche criterias. Here is the problem:
I am not talking about inexperienced farmers which connect their wallets with one another.
Nobody has ever before tracked users IP addresses and even if they do, i doubt you are not familiar with the existence of VPNs and proxies. Also i think both you and me know that these people from poor countries are being most of the times funded from richer people so therefore it’s not only the principle “quantity over quality”. I simply wanted to give large proportion to niche criterias since lesser people are using them with higher % of chance for them being real. Anyway i agree that some changes could be made with my proposal regarding dca and limit order allocations but it will be to bump up the perpetual users allo, i will not add anything more to swappers since they have farmed and earned in S1, and i think that they shouldn’t have it that easy this time.
After all I agree to disagree for the proportions of the allocations.
The fact that fewer people are using these features is no guarantee whatsoever for them having a higher percentage change that the users are real. I’ve shown in previous arguments that DCA and Limit are also being farmed, and regarding swap I’ve provided many ways that deduplication can be performed to weed out airdrop farmers, which can also be used to filter out farmers for any other features.
I also agree to disagree Wishing you the best of luck
‘‘Cloudflare provides insight to your website traffic that you can’t get from other analytics programs’’ Analytics Insights
It’s industry standard for any website to record IP addresses from visits, but I can’t say for sure that Jupiter is tracking and/or using these. Maybe they don’t.
The methods mentioned are just examples, but I’m sure they have a lot of data they can use for deduplication to weed out airdrop farmers.
Although I must admit that Cloudflare Analytics has a strong focus on Privacy Preserving anayltics.
Speaking with JUP & JUICE, Soju credited Jupiter DAO’s creativity, stating “there are a lot of wonderful proposals about Jupuary on JupResearch”. While the Jupiter team ultimately calls the shots, JupResearch proposals could be used to inspire certain eligibility criteria.
The most popular proposals on JupResearch, a Jupiter DAO forum, typically allocate various amounts of tokens to Jupiter products.
One proposal by JUPWhale suggests splitting the 700M scheduled for distribution based on trading volume, $JUP staking, $JLP holdership, DCA/Limit Order use, and perpetual trading volume.
Jupuary Proposals Likely to Favor $JUP Stakers
If any aspects of Jupuary eligibility criteria are to be voted on by Jupiter DAO, it is likely that results will heavily favor $JUP stakers.
As noted by JUPWhale on JupResearch, proposals on eligibility criteria present a conflict of interest wherein $JUP stakers will vote for whatever gives them the best allocation, regardless of whether or not that benefits the protocol.
According to Flipside data, 12.95% of Jupiter voting power is held in 50 wallets, representing only 0.008% of the total number of stakers. This suggests that a relatively small group of holders wield considerable influence over an ecosystem with hundreds of thousands of users.
I think this is broadly a good proposal and I think it has been improved, the one thing I’d mention here is that maybe a minimum of 2 distinct months of utilization as an allocation requirement would be worthwhile as a sybil deterrent.
The $1000 minimum allo is better, $100 was too small.
My only strong disagreement is related to linearity in regards to JLP and Jup staking. If the allocation is linear, it ought to have caps. Again, linear is anti-decentralization and makes the vote largely pointless if Jupuary is going to serve to massively entrench those with top voting power.
There’s a reason we don’t give a linear voting power to Americans based on net worth. Because it simply isn’t democratic. Its a whales game for which their incentive is to milk the country (or protocol) of value in the short term then leave. 50-100 people having more voting power than a million smaller users is nonsensical, its virtue signalling towards being democratic or decentralized, but ultimately has nothing to do with it.
Now take that, but imagine those billionaires voted at the election for an instant 25% increase to their voting power. Come on, its silly.
This was distinctly the opposite approach of the last Jupuary for reference.
The strong disagreement is partially as a result of us already having the ASR. We simply don’t need a second, it adds nothing to the community which is the purpose of Jupuary to begin with.
As you suggest, perps should be tiered and in my opinion meaningfully capped at the top and bottom as well.
Apart from that, I think the allocation sizes all look reasonable. Good work broadly I just have a philosophical difference of opinion on the linear issue, I also again point out I think this was antithetical to the first drop and the purpose of Jupuary, and broadly tokens that allocate linearly have performed horribly.
I think the tier rewards aren’t that meaningful and I don’t see them getting new potential users interested in playing with Jupiter. More people need to be weeded out. Jupiter in astrology means wealth and expansion…it should be bigger. Maybe include 2 million users, not 4 million.
I thought Jupiter wanted to attract more users of its products? Swaps should count, but other products should have multipliers.
Thanks for the feedback. This change has been applied in the latest version. Check it out here:
Other products have good allocations in my proposal. Actual multipliers would be less meaningful and less direct as it depends on ones trading volume and it doesn’t ensure a next tier.
We have 15X the volume ($481.5B total compared to $30B last year) and also have 15X the users base. User base growth is 11X when you count those in the $1,000+ tiers compared to last year. Last year only 211,000 users were in tiers, now it’s 2,300,000. We have 30% less tokens to allocate this Jupuary.
This results in a 20X smaller allocation on average.
But for users who’ve been active with trading, new features, in the community and staking/voting it can still be a nice amount of JUP.
The most active Jupiter users and community members get the most in my proposal. And the team has made it very clear; Jupiter is a gift, not a reward.
The topic here is with allocating Jupiter to stakers, not about giving voting power to stakers.
That’s basically what all Billionares do by donating to election campaigns and social media marketing etc. aligned with their interest to sway voters.
As a financial protocol someone’s vote with 10M counts more than someone with 1M and someone with 1M counts more than someone with 100K and someone with 100K his vote counts more than the vote of a 10K holder etc.
I agree with you ethically, logically and intrinsically. But there’s a political reason:
The Jupiter community needs Jupuary for expansion.
Jupuary needs the DAO to pass the vote with a yes.
The community needs Jupuary. But IMO it’s unlikely we’ll see a Jupuary vote passed by the DAO without allocating a 25% bonus (110M JUP) to JUP stakers whom seem to be wanting and demanding even much more.
The team essentially had the power to push it, but now that there is a DAO everything needs to be alligned with both the team, the community as well as with JUP holders (stakers) by passing DAO votes. So the team and community needs to incentive the DAO to vote yes to align them with Jupuary.
As you suggest, perps should be tiered and in my opinion meaningfully capped at the top and bottom as well.
I think that’s reasonable and could be done if the team, depending on if the team agrees or not.
Again I appreciate your feedback! Let’s see which parts of the discussion they’ll mention in the call tomorrow at 3.30 UTC: https://www.youtube.com/live/HdrXWKPkUDU
Multipliers would be meaningful for the other products in the jupiter eco because they have more value at this point. I actually think maybe swaps should be removed from the whole thing…that’s where most of the gaming is if we are being honest. If bigger rewards are given to DCA, Limit, VA and Perps…there would be way more users interested in those products next year.
Sure right take off swaps all together and better yet just drop it all to any person who looks exsactly like me, in fact better yet who is me. I would vote for that. Come on guys use your voting power to support my proposal it really benefits the dex. I promise. Hahaha. Just adding a bit of humour here
You seem to not read much of what was written up here. Please read first so your contribution can be more meaningful. What you’re saying is even contradicting each other. Allow me to explain one last time.
A multiplier means that the volume is multiplied with a multiplier, for example 1.5X or 2X etc. This would only maybe result in a higher volume tier, but might not at all result in a higher airdrop.
Much better is actual allocations for these new categories mentioned in my proposal.
‘‘Other products have good allocations in my proposal. Actual multipliers would be less meaningful and less direct as it depends on ones trading volume and it doesn’t ensure a next tier.’’
The rest of your message clearly shows you didn’t read any of the above discussions about deduplication and the weight of trading volume for a DEX.
What are you talking about?
70% of all trading volume is swaps ($340B out of $481.5B).
The remaining 27% is perpetuals and only 2.5% DCA and Limit order combined.
11,361,557 low volume users who tried to game the system are excluded in my proposal! Those are mainly farmers and bot transaction wallets.
There is absolutely 0 reason to remove allocations from high volume users which contains mainly legit users.
Deduplication and anti-sybil can be applied to weed out the last farmers.
I’ve read your proposal, and I’m still allowed to disagree. Jupiters reason for the airdrop is for growth. in order to do that, they would have to incentivize people to use other products besides Swap. Meow even said today this drop isnt going to be as inclusive as last years drop. I’m thinking swaps may not even be counted. The multiplier is to grant more value to the other products, like last year It means if you have used those products consistently, you may get a higher allocation, bottom line.
Of course, we can agree to disagree. They are likely going to cut a lot of fat because there are way too many wallets.
Yes, rewarding all i agree bro. Even @meow stated that the criteria for the second jupuary will be completely different.
My guess will be more of contributions for the growth of the dao and jupiverse community. THE CRTIERIA? I don’t know, i trust the team with that decision.
Sure feel free to think what you want, but the speculation of an individual isn’t contributing anything to this discussion. There are millions of opinions in the Jupiter community. This is a research forum where you can share ideas with reason, solid argumentation, data and proof.
When you listen to what Meow said in the JUP Really Townhall that’s not at all what he is saying. In the JUP Really the day before the town hall he said that there will be specific criteria which will exclude many wallets. This idea is also part of my proposal which the team has read, to exclude 11,361,557+ low volume wallets.
In the Townhall he actually said around the 1 hour mark and after that this round of Jupuary will still be similar to last round and that it’s too late now for big changes [since the round #2 year has already passed] but that there would be some allocations of specific categories, and that round 3 can be more focussed towards adoption of specific aspects of Jupiter. He also said the team’s proposal would include an allocation for the DAO.
Wishing you the best of luck 
