# Jupiter JUP Airdrop: Balanced Proposal for Jupuary 2025 **URL:** \ **Category:** Jupiter DAO\ **Tags:** proposal\ **Created:** [November 5, 2024, 6:28pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573 "2024-11-05T18:28:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![JUPWhale](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/jupwhale/32/5826_2.png) [@JUPWhale](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/JUPWhale)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2024, 7:50pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/142 "2024-11-06T19:50:22Z")
So you want to leave [your proposal](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jup-airdrop-proposal-for-season-2-2025/26419/) unbalanced, unfair and not at all in line with the trading volumes and values the categories contribute to Jupiter. But why? **You say you’re open to changes and yet haven’t made any changes** based on my feedback. How is that? After many thousands of words of valuable and meaningful feedback you received with facts and data to back it up? No time? No energy? Or you don’t care? At first I just thought it was ignorance but not it appears malicious. Why? Because the **trading activity criteria you’re proposing would only benefit just 2.5% of Jupiter users** who fall within your criteria, and **leave 97.5% with little**. For example **Swap have 191X the volume and 115X the amount of users** compared to Limit orders. And you are saying to allocate 70M to [138,685 users](https://dune.com/ilemi/jupiter-limit-orders) doing **1.7 Billion in Limit orders** , but just 140M to [15,940,921 users](https://dune.com/ilemi/jupiter-aggregator-solana) doing **340 Billion in swaps**? Why just 2X the allocation for **191X the volume** and **115X the amount of users**? - [Limit volume](https://dune.com/ilemi/jupiter-limit-orders) = 1.7 Billion ( **191X** times less than swap / **0.5%** of swap volume (340 Billion) **In which world does someone get a 95.5 times higher allocation, for putting a limit on their trade compared to a regular trade?** 😱 Having read all of my feedback you know it’s not right what you’re proposing, but you still leave it up confusing people with strange allocations. If you on the other hand want to have a reasonable contribution, than you might consider the following points to improve your proposal to become a viable alternative: > [@JUP Airdrop Proposal for Season 2 - 2025](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jup-airdrop-proposal-for-season-2-2025/26419/91): > > **Swap volume = 344 Billion (47 times more than DCA & Limit combined)** > > - [Swap volume](https://dune.com/ilemi/jupiter-aggregator-solana) = **344 Billion** ($344,025,879,459) > - [DCA volume](https://dune.com/ilemi/jupiter-dca) = 5.7 Billion ( **60X** times less than swap / **1.6%** of swap volume) > - [Limit volume](https://dune.com/ilemi/jupiter-limit-orders) = 1.7 Billion ( **191X** times less than swap / **0.5%** of swap volume) > - [DCA](https://dune.com/ilemi/jupiter-dca) & [Limit](https://dune.com/ilemi/jupiter-limit-orders) combined = 7.4 Billion ( **47X** less than swap / **2.1%** of swap volume) > > Nobody who honestly looks at above data would conclude that Limit Order & DCA (7.4 Billion / 2.1% of swap / 47X less) should get anything near the allocation of Swap volume (344B volume). > > If the team would do it according to your proposal, swap & limit order users would unfairly get 47 times more allocation as regular traders / swap users! > > The only fair approach here is to treat all volume (swap / DCA / limit) equal, and give a volume multiplier for special / new features (for example 1.5X or 2X multiplier. Why is $100,000+ volume the top tier while there are over 200,000 users in higher tiers? Why is someone with $100K volume rewarded equally to someone with $10M or $100M in volume? The team themselves even included the $100K - $1M and the $1M+ tiers in the last round. Now the volume increased 10X it only makes sense to add another $10M+ tier, but instead you remove two tiers? Why? That doesn’t make any sense looking at the data. Do you know better than the team? It makes me think you did a lot of DCA and Limit farming within the volume tiers you provided, otherwise I can’t think of any reason to propose something so irrational and far from the data. If you agree it doesn’t make sense, why didn’t you make any edits to your proposal after receiving so much thorough feedback? > [@JUPWhale](#): > > - **$10M+ tier** ²: 30M JUP **/** [4,422 users](https://dune.com/queries/4209743) = **6,784 JUP per user** > - **$1M - $10M tier** : 50M JUP **/** [31,920 users](https://dune.com/queries/4209767) = **1,566 JUP per user** > - **$100K - $1M tier** : 90M JUP **/** [182,332 users](https://dune.com/queries/4204770) = **493 JUP per user** And why in your proposal is there no $1K - $10K tier for regular trading volume, while your DCA and Limit proposes a 47X disproportionate amount and includes the $1K - $10K tier? Is there any reason whatsoever to exclude 1,419,121 users? We already know that deduplication and anti-Sybil is not the reason, because it can be done in many more effective ways without excluding over a million legitimate users. > [@JUPWhale](#): > > **$1K - $10K tier** : 90M JUP **/** [1,419,121 users](https://dune.com/queries/4173403) = **63 JUP per user** Why would you only allocate 20% of the airdrop to trading volume from swaps which represent 95%+ of the users and 75% of the volume and activity on Jupiter? That doesn’t make any sense. And especially considering that you arbitrarily leave out over 1 Million legitimate users ([1,419,121 users](https://dune.com/queries/4173403)) $1,000.00 - $10,000.00 in volume. Alternatively you can just apply deduplication and anti-Sybil to filter out the airdrop farmers, to be left with all the legitimate users. > [@JUP Airdrop Proposal for Season 2 - 2025](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jup-airdrop-proposal-for-season-2-2025/26419/94): > > **1.** As a community we can’t just allocate 47X more to a certain feature (like Swap or Limit) in the hope that it has been abused less. We have to use data and use effective deduplication and anti-Sybil, using a blockchain analysis tool. > > **2.** There’s no knowing if the percentage of farmers is lower among DCA & Limit compared to swap. Likely not as we’ve seen from the YouTube video’s people have also been farming those. > > **3.** Most of the gaming with swap volume is already being filtered out with the $100 minimum volume which filters out 73% of wallets (11,361,557). > > > [@Jupiter Airdrop Round 2 (2025): Analysis, Discussion & Proposal for Distribution](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-airdrop-round-2-2025-analysis-discussion-proposal-for-distribution/26133/1): > > > > - **$0 - $100 wallets²** : No Allocation **/** 11,361,557 users = **0 JUP per wallet** > > **4.** Further gaming will be filtered out with **blockchain analysis** performing **deduplication** and **anti-Sybil.** There is therefore no need for arbitrary filtering. > > **5.** **[The tiers in my proposal](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-airdrop-round-2-2025-analysis-discussion-proposal-for-distribution/26133)** indicate **2.3 Million users (2,302,243) of Jupiter with $1,000+ volume**. This is very realistic considering that JUP alone already has 800,000 holders already, and not yet everyone using Jupiter holds JUP. Nearly everyone on Solana uses Jupiter and the Solana user base has grown like crazy into the many millions since 1 year ago, especially during the memecoin bullruns of late 2023 and around April 2024 with more memecoins exploding every month. > [@JUP Airdrop Proposal for Season 2 - 2025](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jup-airdrop-proposal-for-season-2-2025/26419/3): > > The DCA and Limit orders are too nice specific to receive an equal allocation of 140M JUP relative to Swap volume which most people use. **Only 1.3% of users is using the DCA or Limit order function, leaving out 98.7% of Jupiter users.** > > **On Solana when people want to buy or sell a memecoin, they’ll just swap SOL for that coin** or the coin back to SOL. DCA and Limit is a niche trading functions. There’s no specific reason to push or promote it that much. Most people don’t use it. > > Putting so much focus on DCA and Limit puts too much JUP in the hands of a 189,249 - 211,049 traders, while greatly disadvantaging regular swap users. > > **These ~ 200,000 traders only represent 1.3% or 1 / 77th of all 15.5 Million users.** The other 98.7% of users is neglected in the proposal. > > Even when only considering the 3,885,443 with $100+ volume users of Jupiter, you’re still leaving out nearly 95% (~ 200,000 vs 3,885,443). > > The proposal furthermore neglects and excludes some very important user tiers. > > **This is leaving out 5.2 Million mostly legitimate users, who are the average memecoin traders on Solana / Jupiter.** The $1,000 - $10,000 tier of 1,419,121 users is strongly neglected, as well as the $100+ general tier of 3,885,443 users. > [@JUP Airdrop Proposal for Season 2 - 2025](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jup-airdrop-proposal-for-season-2-2025/26419/4): > > [This proposal](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-airdrop-round-2-2025-analysis-discussion-proposal-for-distribution/26133/) in my opinion is **more fair, distributed, decentralised, balanced, growth-oriented and less easily manipulated** - than the above. > > **It is manually written (not with ChatGPT** like the above proposal) and includes feedback from dozens of community members on this forum. > > **It rewards many more legitimate users** with a small airdrop providing **greater distribution and decentralisation**. Whereas your proposal is focussed towards around 200,000 users, the below proposal includes **nearly 4 Million users.** > > **It also doesn’t put large allocations into the hands of relatively small groups** like 1% - 5% of users as in your proposal (see my previous comments) but considers a much broader user base of 3,885,443 users with $100+ volume while also giving more weight to high volume power users in a sophisticated tiered approach. > > **It does not provide easy opportunities for gaming the system** , as your proposal does with the minimum allocation of 100 JUP for any Staking, DCA and Limit. > > **It covers all relevant categories** like DAO / Stakers, Community contributors, New Feature Users, traders of JUP / JLP / JupSOL, Perpetual traders and JLP holders (liquidity providers) in addition to **7 important and specific volume tiers**. > [@Jupiter Airdrop Round 2 (2025): Analysis, Discussion & Proposal for Distribution](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-airdrop-round-2-2025-analysis-discussion-proposal-for-distribution/26133/197): > > **Trading volume and user count / onboarding is and will always be the most important metric for any cryptocurrency exchange** , centralised or decentralised. > > **Trading is something that every Jupiter user does.** That’s how the average memecoin degen is onboarded onto Jupiter, by doing some memecoin swaps. That’s why there are 3,885,443 users with $100+ volume and 1,419,121 users in the $1,000 - $10,000 trading volume tier. > > **Most people use Jupiter to swap memecoins** , while only around ~ 5% - 10% of users utilise the more advanced features of the Jupiverse. > > **Jupuary is an opportunity to engage these millions of regular users** , and to concert them to the Jupiverse with all it’s options like JUP, JLP liquidity providing, JupSOL, advance trading features, DAO / Staking JUP, Perpetual contracts etc. > > **The volume tiers help identify which users are more valuable and contribute more** to the trading volume. It would be irrational to further reduce volume-based allocation. Although trading volume tiers will have less focus in round 2 compared to round 1, they deserve an important role in the Jupuary airdrop. I rest my case. May the best elements of the proposals be implemented. ---
**Author:** ![JUPWhale](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/jupwhale/32/5826_2.png) [@JUPWhale](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/JUPWhale)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2024, 8:39pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/143 "2024-11-06T20:39:59Z")
Check out **[this bullish video update about Jupuary!](https://x.com/SolanaFloor/status/1853859684668641501)** by Soju! - Soji confirmed that the next vote will be Jupuary in 1 - 2,5 weeks - The team (at least 7 people) are all working on Jupuary together - ‘‘_ **there’s a lot of wonderful proposals about Jupuary** on Jupresear.ch, which we didn’t ask for. Lot’s of hard work went into those proposals_’’ - ‘‘_ **I’m reading every single proposal on Jupresearch** to try to shape how we think of things_’’ - ‘‘_Meow has some thoughts as well, and **he will be unveiling everything starting on Friday** at the JUP Really, and then we’ll be following up with the DAO proposal_…’’ \_ ![Screenshot 2024-11-06 at 21.28.23](https://canada1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/uploads/jupresear/original/2X/a/a408ea8609b6e2f86ea8fdc70578320ae9afd436.jpeg) ---
**Author:** ![Mbolorman](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/mbolorman/32/4735_2.png) [@Mbolorman](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/Mbolorman)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2024, 8:45pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/144 "2024-11-06T20:45:28Z")
So like we have been saying all along, the team reads these proposals and they are well informed. We trust the team to reach a balance set of criteria that will satisfy the majority in the eco-system. It’s good that many have contributed their views and think @JUPWhale and many others have captured everyone’s attention for the last week+ with several proposals and reviews. It’s been an exciting topic! ---
**Author:** ![Workwithnature](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/workwithnature/32/7672_2.png) [@Workwithnature](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/Workwithnature)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2024, 9:15pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/145 "2024-11-06T21:15:34Z")
Friend I think I was very clear. Am saying to exclude voting power all together. Otherwise it is no different than the yearly airdrop and does nothing for decentralised voting. I hope you understand what I am trying to say 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![miuq](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/miuq/32/7752_2.png) [@miuq](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/miuq)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2024, 9:36pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/146 "2024-11-06T21:36:51Z")
> [@miuq](#): > > 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](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/how-much-rewards-from-staking-and-voting/26502) ), 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. I’m curious if you don’t agree with this? ---
**Author:** ![Workwithnature](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/workwithnature/32/7672_2.png) [@Workwithnature](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/Workwithnature)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2024, 10:00pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/147 "2024-11-06T22:00:02Z")
Sorry but how can I friend. Dilution of Jup is not the same as funnelling a large airdrop towards those who already own a lot of staked Jup. About half the stakers have less than 1000 jup staked but like all voters may or may not have voted a lot. Many of those under 1000 jup stakers are legit and voted on proposals the entire year. Those with over 1000 Jup staked are already getting a separate airdrop yearly and if you include a smaller portion of an airdrop towards the bigger whales fine. But don’t forget the smaller voters who I believe are mostly newer users. The airdrop I am suggesting is to also increase those wallets that are staking low amounts but participate a lot. I also think it should be auto staked. This means more voters now have a bigger amount of voting power. Helps towards decentralised decision making. ---
**Author:** ![miuq](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/miuq/32/7752_2.png) [@miuq](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/miuq)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2024, 10:15pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/148 "2024-11-06T22:15:09Z")
Alright, you have your opinion. As we have discussed here the past 2 weeks, if we introduce a tiered approach, it would also reward people who simply have split their JUP into several wallets to vote. If we then start deduplicating them as sybils, lots of legit voters with several wallets would lose a lot because they made the decision of splitting their JUP. This would not be fair either. I personally (any most others here) think the linear approach for DAO voters is the fairest one and also prevents gaming the system completely. Diluting the voting power from current voters means the power will be spread among more people, which is the same as decentralising. On top of this, anyone is free to stake their JUP and further decentralise the DAO. It is open for everyone at all time. I recommend anyone who is not staking and voting to consider participating. “_ **Decentralization** or **decentralisation** is the process by which the activities of an organization, particularly those related to planning and decision-making, are distributed or delegated away from a central, authoritative location or group and given to smaller factions within it._” [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralization) ---
**Author:** ![kclass](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/779978/32.png) [@kclass](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/kclass)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2024, 11:01pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/149 "2024-11-06T23:01:15Z")
It’s a nice very left oriented idea but crypto is mainly capitalistic. There are no 100 staked jup free lunches. If you want more JUP out of the system you need to take more risk. Risk vs reward. ---
**Author:** ![Workwithnature](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/workwithnature/32/7672_2.png) [@Workwithnature](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/Workwithnature)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2024, 11:03pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/150 "2024-11-06T23:03:18Z")
Sure nice talking with you about it. Personally am not worried as I started using Jup back in last November. Pretty much tried out most things. I will of course stake any airdrop I get as I believe 10 easy this cycle and 150 next one. Who knows. Hope some billionaire doesn’t drop like a 100 million to staking one day. Means all our votes would mean bout. Price sure would go up. Lastly multi wallets is definitely really gaming the system and am sure most will be excluded. But let’s face it every single staker here is an airdrop farmer too no? Everyone is trying to get a nice airdrop with their ideas and opinions:) guess that’s normal. ---
**Author:** ![Workwithnature](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/workwithnature/32/7672_2.png) [@Workwithnature](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/Workwithnature)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2024, 11:09pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/151 "2024-11-06T23:09:59Z")
Left right upside down back to front 🙂 Dex means decentralised exchange. Capitalism is all good by me. But biased voting on tokenomics proposals that uses a tool of voting power that determines the outcome may not be such a good idea after all. Cracks me up that. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Notadragon](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/notadragon/32/4478_2.png) [@Notadragon](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/Notadragon)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2024, 10:31am UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/152 "2024-11-07T10:31:33Z")
I think your view on this is flawed, your values are aligned with volume rather than contribution. Person A does 1 swap of 100 sol inot USDC and prints 15k volume Person B hasn’t the funds to do anything onchain but gets into the community, they participate in the discord, the learn about JUP & its values and the decide to contribute further. They make videos, education material, they participate in debate, they shape the outcome of the protocol in a more meaningful way than a simple swapper. Person B is more aligned with JUP than the swapper, the deserve a significant allocation for further governance votes. Yes i think you need to increase the community allocation as there are far more worthy contributors than swappers that deserve more of an allocation as we know that those individuals will meaningfully shape the future of the protocol and we wants those people to have more say in governance matters. Your fixation on data will hurt the active contributors who have actually got JUP into this position, data does not always tell the full story & JUP has the biggest & strongest community in the entire crypto sphere and not properly rewarding those contributors would be wrong. 50m is not enough, it should be closer to 20% imo ---
**Author:** ![tansion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ebca7d/32.png) [@tansion](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/tansion)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2024, 10:36am UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/153 "2024-11-07T10:36:48Z")
First of all, please think about why MEOW changed the 60 million votes to 120 million, and the final result is 30% to pass the proposal. Thirdly, do we need giant whales or more users? If according to your proposal, The distribution of DAO will only allow the whales to have more JUPs and become more centralized. Third, there are two users. One user participated in the voting from March to October and voted more than 10 times, but he only pledged 50 JUP. Another user only staked 1,000 JUP in October and only voted once. For these two situations, what do you think is a more reasonable distribution? ---
**Author:** ![miuq](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/miuq/32/7752_2.png) [@miuq](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/miuq)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2024, 11:08am UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/154 "2024-11-07T11:08:00Z")
> [@tansion](#): > > First of all, please think about why MEOW changed the 60 million votes to 120 million, and the final result is 30% to pass the proposal. As the amount of voters and amount of JUP used for voting is increasing, we also have to increase the quorum. Now it’s tied to 30% so it stays fixed in relation to amount of JUP used for voting and therefore reduces the risk of centralised group of voters having too much influence in regards of if a proposal passes or not. > [@tansion](#): > > If according to your proposal, The distribution of DAO will only allow the whales to have more JUPs and become more centralized. Third, there are two users. One user participated in the voting from March to October and voted more than 10 times, but he only pledged 50 JUP. Another user only staked 1,000 JUP in October and only voted once. For these two situations, what do you think is a more reasonable distribution? Let me quote my earlier answer here. > [@miuq](#): > > 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](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/how-much-rewards-from-staking-and-voting/26502) ), 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. > [@miuq](#): > > “_ **Decentralization** or **decentralisation** is the process by which the activities of an organization, particularly those related to planning and decision-making, are distributed or delegated away from a central, authoritative location or group and given to smaller factions within it._” > > [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralization) ---
**Author:** ![JUPWhale](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/jupwhale/32/5826_2.png) [@JUPWhale](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/JUPWhale)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2024, 11:45am UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/155 "2024-11-07T11:45:24Z")
Look friend, morally and logically speaking I might agree with you. But there is something else we need to consider, and that’s the politics. > [@Jupiter Airdrop Round 2 (2025): Analysis, Discussion & Proposal for Distribution](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-airdrop-round-2-2025-analysis-discussion-proposal-for-distribution/26133/340): > > 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. A 110M allocation / 25% bonus is a lot for just ~ 300,000 decent sized stakers (not counting below 50 JUP stakers), but it’s not disproportional compared to the other users and allocations. It’s a fair reward considering the future of Jupuary depends on the DAO. We have better chances of having the Jupuary vote passed with a reasonable allocation for the DAO. ---
**Author:** ![Workwithnature](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/workwithnature/32/7672_2.png) [@Workwithnature](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/Workwithnature)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2024, 12:55pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/156 "2024-11-07T12:55:36Z")
Yes but why not include a fair distribution to all stakers too after Sybil check. There was a reason why you only needed 10 jup to vote. To try the voting out to participate in voting for new users. I think all stakers minus fake accounts are probably the most dedicated people. Excluding half of them in any meaningful airdrop will upset a lot of new users. ---
**Author:** ![Workwithnature](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/workwithnature/32/7672_2.png) [@Workwithnature](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/Workwithnature)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2024, 1:25pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/157 "2024-11-07T13:25:25Z")
Also here is probably the reality. On the one hand you have people who staked a lot but because of this they could not rack up volume. But they are getting a continuous airdrop already and probably had the good sense to get the first airdrop. On the other you have users who used the exchange a lot thereby creating a lot of volume but may have very low capital staked but are still dedicated voters. Then there are non users as you mentioned yourself that may be drawn in by giving an airdrop as well. All are equally important. But most of Jupuary in my view should be given to the middle group as you will decentralise voting power further and put Jup into the hands of people who are new since first airdrop. Especially as high amount stakers are rewarded yearly using Jupuary unclaimed tokens. This number is like 30% correct. Not saying they should get nothing in Jupuary but I believe it’s in their interest as well to get new users. Sure would be nice to get another big airdrop for whales but I believe the last one was In July right. Also I believe one criteria should be excluded from voting and that is airdrop allocations. For obvious reasons. ---
**Author:** ![Workwithnature](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/workwithnature/32/7672_2.png) [@Workwithnature](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/Workwithnature)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2024, 2:07pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/158 "2024-11-07T14:07:11Z")
Here is a quick proposal of what it could look like. 10% to all voters based on voting power times votes cast. 55% to all voters based on just votes cast. Minimum volume of perhaps 10k or not. Helps exclude Sybil. The 55% allocation also includes those that only used the dex and did not vote but also based on volume starting at 100$. 5% towards social media users. 10% to all users under 100$ volume. After Sybil. 10% airdroped to non users. 9% towards multiplier for using dex tools. 1% to pay for airdrop. ---
**Author:** ![JUPWhale](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/jupwhale/32/5826_2.png) [@JUPWhale](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/JUPWhale)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2024, 3:01pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/159 "2024-11-07T15:01:28Z")
Your proposal would be great for the dude who created those 19,000 wallets with 0,1 JUP in them and staked and voted JUP, but most here do not have the intention to play right into the hands of airdrop farmers. I’m sorry mate but clearly my proposals has a bit more work put into them and would likely carry more weight with a broader audience due to extensive. There’s no way the team is going to give the same airdrop to a 0,1 JUP staker, a 1 JUP staker, a 10 JUP staker, a 100 JUP staker, a 1000 JUP staker, a 10,000 staker, a 100,000 JUP staker, a 1,000,000 JUP staker and a 10,000,000 JUP staker. In my proposal they will all get an equal amount relative to the total votes they cast, which is approximately 34.3%. > [@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. - **3.43 JUP** for a staker with 10 JUP who cast 10 votes = 100 votes. - **34.3 JUP** for a staker with 100 JUP who cast 10 votes = 1,000 votes. - **343 JUP** for a staker with 1000 JUP who cast 10 votes = 10,000 votes. - **3,430 JUP** for a staker with 10,000 JUP who cast 10 votes = 100,000 votes. - **34,300 JUP** for a staker with 100,000 JUP who cast 10 votes = 1,000,000 votes. etc. etc. I’m not going to change this based on your feedback because it doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. ---
**Author:** ![Workwithnature](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/workwithnature/32/7672_2.png) [@Workwithnature](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/Workwithnature)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2024, 3:22pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/160 "2024-11-07T15:22:07Z")
I think we all know that multi wallets will be excluded. There is no way the team will give whales another large airdrop. Or this would come across as a cex and not a dex. Plus I read it’s supposed to benefit new users. I think you guys are an eco chamber with one proposal controlled by your combined large voting power. Give the majority of the airdrop to whales. Not the spirit of decentralisation. ---
**Author:** ![JUPWhale](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/jupwhale/32/5826_2.png) [@JUPWhale](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/JUPWhale)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2024, 3:39pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/161 "2024-11-07T15:39:12Z")
That is not true. My proposal is very clear about this. It has a fair and balanced community distribution to 2,3 Million users. Over 90% of these are new users. The more engaged users will be contributed the most, based on their impact and contribution in terms of eg. trading volumes and staking amount. 100% of the allocation is towards the community of Jupiter users. Regular traders, leverage traders, liquidity providers, and people using different features and tokens of the Jupiter ecosystem as well as JUP holders and stakers. Everyone is covered. > [@JUPWhale](#): > > # **Final Proposal** > > After implementing feedback and discussion from [300+ comments](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-airdrop-round-2-2025-analysis-discussion-proposal-for-distribution/26133) and 10+ similar topics I have made a final proposal. The proposal splits the 700M in two equal parts of 50% / 50%. > > Regular trading volume without leverage makes up **71.5% of Jupiter trading volume** and **78% - 86.7%+ of the user count** ([353,468 JUP stakers](https://dune.com/d3xter/staked-jup) with 50+ JUP vs [2,302,243 traders](https://dune.com/queries/4245548) with $1,000.00+ volume). It would be fair to allocate at least 50% to these 87.7% $1,000.00+ users. > > The other 50% (350M) is allocated to JUP Stakers, leveraged trading (perps), community contributors, New Features users and JLP holders. Below you can see how this plays out. > > # All Non-Leveraged Trading Volume (all except perps) > > Below allocations per tier are **19X - 64X times less** than in the Jupuary airdrop round #1! > > **350M JUP (50% of Jupuary) | 5 Adjusted Tiers of all Non-Leveraged Trading Volume¹:** > > - **$10M+ tier** ²: 30M JUP **/** [4,422 users](https://dune.com/queries/4209743) = **6,784 JUP per user** > - **$1M - $10M tier** : 50M JUP **/** [31,920 users](https://dune.com/queries/4209767) = **1,566 JUP per user** > - **$100K - $1M tier** : 90M JUP **/** [182,332 users](https://dune.com/queries/4204770) = **493 JUP per user** > - **$10K - $100K tier** : 90M JUP **/** [664,448 users](https://dune.com/queries/4204768) = **135 JUP per user** > - **$1K - $10K tier** : 90M JUP **/** [1,419,121 users](https://dune.com/queries/4173403) = **63 JUP per user** > \_\_ > - $0 - $1,000 wallets: No Allocation³ **/** ~ [13,197,757 users](https://dune.com/queries/3099651/5172121) = 0 JUP > . > > **¹** _This category includes all trading volume from Swaps, DCA’s and Limit orders. Regular **swap trades still represent ~ 71.5% ($344B) of all $481.5B volume** on Jupiter, with Jupiter perps making up the remaining 27% of volume ($130B) and DCA & Limit only 1.5% (7.5B). The tier users have to still be added by the team; it represents a small portion of 1.5% with no big impact._ > > **²** _ **A new $10M+ tier** is added to reflect the **9.5X volume growth of Jupiter in 1 year**. The new tier properly rewards the top power users like traders, whales and KOL’s._ > > **³** _ **$1,000.00 minimum volume requirement used** to reduce the general user base from ~ 15.5 Million wallets to just ~ 2.3 Million users. **This effectively weeds out around ~ 13.2 Million low quality spam users / bots and airdrop farmers.** No allocation for wallets with \< $1,000.00 volume. Further solid deduplication & anti-Sybil also need to be performed with blockchain tools._ > > * * * > > # Stakers, Perps, Community, New Features & JLP > > Below Allocations are all new and are now just being introduced for the first time in Jupuary. > > **350M JUP (50%) | JUP Stakers, Perps, Community, New Tokens and Features & JLP** > > - **DAO / Stakers¹:** **110M JUP** for 440M Staked JUP = **250 JUP per 1,000 JUP Staked** > - **Community contributors²:** **50M JUP** / ~ [156,198 members](https://discord.com/invite/jup) = **~ 320 JUP on average** > - **New Token & Feature Users³ bonus:** **50M JUP** : **/** est. 1M users = **~ 50 JUP on average** > - **JLP Holders⁴ bonus:** **20M JUP** / 235M JLP x 1000 = **85 JUP per 1000 JLP** > - **Perpetual Traders⁵:** **120M JUP** / 129.7B = \*\*~ **925 JUP per $1M perp volume** (still has to be properly tiered⁶ among the 234,576 traders, once this data is coded into a new script) > . > > **¹** _0.25 JUP per 1 staked JUP / 25% bonus on top of staked JUP. This is actually to be rewarded linearly on the total voted amount, considering consistency and contribution._ > **²** _eg. Discord, Workgroups, Forums, POAP, Promotors etc. based on level of contribution; manual review by the team as before_ > **³** _Any user who traded JUP, JLP, JupSOL or WEN and/or who used new Jupiter niche features like DCA, DVA, Ape. Volume based distribution, specifics up to the team._ > **⁴** _If possible using the average of different snapshots of round 2._ > **⁵** _Average Jupiter perps trader did $553K trading volume (129,7B / 234,576 users). Average per trader = 120M JUP / 129.7B total volume = ~ 925 JUP per $1M perp volume (average)_ > **⁶** _Must be properly tiered, but we didn’t yet make a script to identity the appropriate tiers and the users per tier. Since the average trading volume per user for Perps of $553K is 25X larger vs Swap at $22K, the tiering will likely also be 25X larger as swap (pending final data)._ [Previous page](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573.md?page=7) [Next page](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573.md?page=9)