In my opinion, Optimism Quest is an excellent way to attract new users to join Crypto world.
so, be nice to the new users in Optimism.
It’s useful that new users need time to learn how to DeFi or Purchase NFT or mint NFT.
So, I think Quest should be a large criteria for airdrop 2.
How to value a new users’ act is helpful to the Optimism?
Collecting OATs.
I don’t think this is a good idea, quest activities attract a lot of new users to try using op, even if they just want to get the airdrop, they also bring a lot of funds to op. I want to propose a solution: 1, all users who transfer all tokens to other networks after participating in quest will not get the airdrop. 2, all users who participated in quest and kept their funds in op will enjoy normal multiplier airdrop. 3, all users who participated in quest and purchased op to participate in governance will get more airdrop.
In my opinion, it would be better to drop more token for the users who did the quest by themselves than the users who buy from the NFT market. and have the multiple for the users who hold OP token or have transaction more than xxx times.
Lazy boy said like this.
But quests relate directly to activity in the wallets of the participants. Wouldn’t the result be the same? Or do you mean ignore those who purchased the NFTs?
@bangrygoose I agree with you
just need more multipliers to get random people walking by
As a genuine Quest user, but one who is also poor, i think ive done the Quests and have maybe 2 other OP transactions afterwards bcz ive been using MATIC lately (i had some bread already left on it after FTX got me luckily).
I know im 1 person and cant have the protocol alter their criteria for me, just voicing my opinion to let ppl know that theres some of us (after falling victim to FTX at the worst time) who are genuine community members but are left picking up the pieces from FTX.
Either way, thanks for what ALL yall do
Not a terrible take (with some tweaks)
Actually you are spot on here.
I just enjoy quests and learn new protocol
Even if we do not know the criteria of the second drop, it is very likely that the regular activity on chain will be privileged as criterion. This was already a criterion for the first drop. Also, I think that the quests will not be the main criterion. Otherwise, it leaves room for many bots to come farm the drop. As Optimism matures, the eligibility criteria will have evolved naturally. We can trust the team for that 
In order to complete all of the quests, a user would need to have around $1000 in various wallets. If their goal is to finish all of the Optimism Quests on multiple wallets, they would likely use the same funds, moving them between wallets. The only solution would be to add more funds to the Optimism chain for each wallet, otherwise it would be too easy to identify and filter out farmers. That’s why I thought that this could be used as a way to filter out Sybils. What is your opinion on this? And to be clear, I am not suggesting an airdrop. Sybil is a bigger problem that requires a lot of brainstorming and I thought that these quests could potentially help with that.
very well said, i completely agree
As I said before!! If Nfts per Quest enter as criteria for Airdrop. Well, let them filter those who acquired in the secondary market!! and take into account only those that were earned by completing the Quest.
I thought the quest NFT was great but in hindsight the user experience could be improved upon ten fold.
These will be more related to traits on the optimist NFT for token house delegates which is an interesting use case of NFT attributes that are traded in association with a non transferable profile picture NFT.
Airdrop hunters can speculate all they want but we have to wait and see what happens.
Considering that volume of transactions skyrocketed during the period of the quest and cliffed after the quest was over, I don not think that those who participated in the quest should be punished. They deserve to be rewarded in some form. Bravo, Optimists! Bravo!
I agree with this opinion, a wallet that only enters to do 18 quests and leaves just for personal gain, and a wallet that continuously has weekly transactions on Optimisim’s ecosystem and long-term efforts should be appreciated. , I agree with the author
Can you drop your wallet to see your organnically made transactions?
In this case, it is advisable to use a metric tied to a non-zero balance for a certain period of time. For example, counting the weeks in which the user has more than $50 in his wallet (in equivalent). The main thing is to find the right balance between what the average user can own and how much the sibyl can afford to keep on all her wallets at the same time.
This criterion cannot be used alone. However, it can be used to identify suspicious addresses, and then, in combination with other criteria, draw a final conclusion.
As for me, these Quests are an indicator that the project is interested, and so many of those who have gone through them may actually end up being interested in the project, although they were not before
On the other hand I understand and partly agree, but I do not think that the quests will be the main criteria
Or maybe there will be another round of airdrop, which will already take into account the number of transactions (by the way, I think it would be more logical to make it a round 3
By the way, I think it’s important to mention the problem of multi-accounts