Airdrop proposal

If the goal is to onboard as much users as possible in Starknet, there are no reason to focus on Starkware users, a thin minority from 2 years ago.

Cluster detection and IP filtering is enough for sybil detection nowadays.

The best airdrops were the ones that did not overdo it.

Check Celestia for exemple, they decided to reward as much people as possible to introduce them to their ecosystem.

What we call DEFI that does not include the term of cluster detection and IP filtering. That is against the DEFI principals.

i don’t agree with you.
afterall it depends on the interaction
anyone who is helping the starknet ecosystem to flourish should be rewarded if drop happens.
sybils have large amount of money. they can use bridge anytime and also certainly will have more than $50+ in their each account
so monthly activity and dapp usage should be considered as much as possible.

Firstly, no it’s not. Else, please list which principals you’re refering to.

Secondly, I may get what you mean with IP filtering. Cluster Detection on the other hand has been conducted by every DeFi protocols for years, with the aim of fighting back against sybil attacks. Resistance to sybil is now against DeFi principals ? It’s nonsense

If you don’t have a bigger group to airdrop to. Then you will get no token movement and price increase. You’ll just have 200K wallets with tokens that no one else has. Which means no demand

Daily transaction numbers have dropped by half since the airdrop and snapshot rumors in the past 24 hours (11/30~12/1).
Seems like bots have been deactivated and airdrop hunters have exited.
We may have found witches.
Accounts that have been dormant or have withdrawn assets from Starknet since 12/1 are most likely Sybil Attackers.
They may be headed to a new hunting ground.
These facts could be used to filter qualifications.

Man you make sense, people on the third world country cannot afford such luxury

Farmer or not…we should be rewarding both sides of the same coin. Starkex is building one of the most exciting ecosystems and I think having tokens would help foster a community. Builders have their role, farmers have their role too. There should be enough space for both to co-exist. Saying neither one should exist is not understanding the whole picture.

The proposed criteria for landing and weeding out Sybils have some potential disadvantages:

1. Exclusion of genuine users: The requirement of having more than three transactions on the Starknet network on different days might exclude genuinely interested users who may have only used the network for specific purposes or less frequently. This could be especially true for users who are new to the blockchain space or are still exploring the Starknet ecosystem.

2. Reliance on wallet balances: Determining eligibility based on wallet balances might not accurately reflect the level of engagement or active use of the Starknet network. Users could temporarily deposit a certain amount to meet the criteria without actually engaging in meaningful transactions.

3. Bias towards participants with higher technical expertise: Requiring users to run a Starknet node on the devnet could favor those with more technical knowledge and resources, potentially disadvantaging users who are less tech-savvy or have limited computing capabilities.

how about now? u still on ur point?

I won’t fully support all you points especially point 3 and point 4.

Why can’t starknet team use ip address to eliminate this sybil of a thing and reward real users.

They can have maximum of 5 wallets per ip just like how arbitrium did.

5 wallets per id because of those that use wallets like argent, bravo, argent mobile …

So i believe 5 wallets per id is fair!!!

Also starknet partnered with Anima Protocol. Starknet team can also use this for sybil resistance.

All users that have done the face verification should not in anyway be tagged as sybil.

Although i feel that not all will want to review their identity having to use face verification. Just saying this as an alternative way and a 100% way to identify real users.

But my first point on using ip address should be valid :100:

There is no point engaging in a discussion on that topic.

As it stand, it is relatively clear that the StarkNet foundation does not have any real intention to remunerate the ecosystem users with substantial amount of STRK so that they feel included in the Governance process.

All these sybil resistant criteria will change very little to nothing as to how much governance we users get ultimately.

Your concern about not perpetuating wealth concentration by avoiding airdrops to those making many transactions on the main Ethereum network is also valid, as it aligns with a more inclusive distribution approach.

Ultimately, the effectiveness of these criteria will depend on the specific goals and values of the Starknet community, and adjustments may be necessary based on community feedback and evolving circumstances.

Hello, great topic. I agree with most, except for the criteria of volume of transactions. I think the volume should be rewarded too but as Tiers, putting a ceiling over it. And also other criterias as the time length of interactions.
As for the amont balance of usd or eth on the address, I think we should not forget the people who put their money on liquidity pool protocols. The deposit into pools and lending should also be counted. Thanks for the contribution!