[PROPOSED] [Airdrop #2: More segmentation of contributor rewards]

In the OP community governance, the rules for subsequent airdrops are an inescapable topic, and how to be as fair as possible is a very important consideration. Put forward the following suggestions, welcome to supplement the shortcomings, and hope that the administrators will consider adopting them!
Based on the settings of Unlocked Supply, the follow-up 14% airdrop should be divided into four stages, that is, once every 6 months, 3.5% each time, which is very reasonable. It is conducive to continuous incentive contribution value, and promotes the prosperity of OP ecology and popularity. .

It is hoped that the rules of subsequent airdrops will be more complete and detailed. For example, the maximum reward is set to 100 points, and different contributions will get different score ratios. If you reach 50 points or more, there will be bonus accumulation. The higher the score, the greater the accumulation.

  1. Optimism Users +5 points
  2. Gitcoin Donors (on L1) +5 points
  3. Multisig Signers +10 points
  4. Repeat Optimism Users +10 points
  5. Airdrop 1 users who have not sold Airdrop 1 claim tokens +10 points
  6. Delegate OP voting rights to yourself, and continue to participate in voting +10 points
  7. Users Priced Out of Ethereum +10 points
  8. More than three interactions in the Optimism ecosystem +10 points
  9. The interaction of participating in the Optimism ecosystem includes at least three sections such as: DEFI, NFT, LENDING, BRIDGE, DAO +10 points
  10. Bonus points for the activity on the address chain, such as total transactions greater than 50 +5 points, more than 100 +10 points
    Other factors that have not been fully considered are welcome. This way of subdividing the airdrop rules can reward users who have made varying degrees of contributions to the OP as much as possible, and can also dilute the witch attack, allowing the team to save the energy of preventing witch attacks and focus on doing things instead.

Subdividing the reward rules as much as possible can effectively achieve fairer rewards for users who have contributed to Optimism to varying degrees, and can also prevent witch attacks, so there is no need to spend energy on how to prevent witch attacks, because after segmentation , even if it is a witch address, the number of airdrops that can be obtained will only be very small. If the witch’s attack can get a cumulative reward, then he is also a witch who has contributed to ecological popularity. Why not give a little bonus?

Will the proposal was clear and hope to be carried upon on thee next phase of airdrops although, it all depends on what are the ratio and proportion that the developers have on their minds

Real users I can say that :smiling_face_with_three_hearts:

1 Like

I have been heavily using OP and the airdrop tokens, so selling, trading, LPs, etc. on the platform, supporting dapps, this should not be penalized as “selling airdrop tokens” if someone dumped them all then no points, like wallets that have not delegated or participated. For me, I see Airdrop 2 as a way to become more vested and used on OP. So of course using the tokens, swapping for gas and other tokens is the meaning.


Hey @Jeremylau interesting proposal! :grin: I have some questions for you:

a) What do you mean by this? :point_down: You refer to Optimism User in point one

b) I would change this point :point_down: for “Users who received the Airdrop #1 tokens and delegate them”
I can’t find the metrics right now, but I know there is a LOT of users who didn’t delegate their tokens.

c) What do you mean by “interactions”? Is this a metric easy to read? Like you said, we have to try to make the work easier for the OP team. Measure of this has to be easy and quick :man_running::running_woman:

Also there is the Soulbound NFTs coming for the Citizen House (we don’t know when yet, maybe we will have Bedrock upgrade first) Maybe with that some of this will be solved


in General I support your proposal.

but I wouldn’t say I liked this clause because choosing a delegate shouldn’t be considered a disadvantage for users
also, some users in the forum really think about proposals and share their opinion but some of them just come here and say ’ I support/like this/ etc’ users who share their valuable opinion must be determined and rewarded (such as OPuser )

1 Like

Would love to see more of a emphasis placed on users who delegate and participate in governance.

For long-term success, it is best to incentivize and reward continued engagement.

Seems like we could do 15 points?

At the end of the day, this model is determined by the Optimism team but early discussion from the community is useful.


I like this one, rewards real long term users!

Here’s the proposal where everyone says what they’ve done, propose it as a criteria, and expect to get airdrop for it.

Good strategy. In fact, there are good suggestions too.

Usually I dont like to jump into airdrop criteria discussion as I believe its better done by OP Lab/Foundation. But you have mentioned couple of good points and would like to read your view on few of them.

Why only on L1? What not zksync and other supported chain ? If you are rewarding public good then why restrict other supporting chain?

Airdrop 1 users who have not sold Airdrop 1 claim tokens

Why is this ? I think, once token is users address its their call what they choose to do with it. For some it might be tax reason, may be someone sold to buy back later at lower price or someone has bills to pay.

Delegate OP voting rights to yourself, and continue to participate in voting

This is a really good point and we are also thinking about it but major challenge is definition of “participation”. How would you define it ? We have seen comments from user adding no value to discussion and just commenting for sake of record and including this point will only boost such unnecessary comment.


And this suggestion is not correct, people who have delegated to a delegate and people who have delegated to themselves are equal participants in the vote.


Further to this, what about including other public goods funding platforms like Giveth and clr.fund?


1、Gitcoin Donors (on L1) follows the standard of the optimistic team airdrop #1, because Gitcoin Donors has not yet launched the optimistic network donation channel, given the standard of airdrop 1, presumably the team is unlikely to support the address of the competitor network donation
2、What you said makes a lot of sense, so even users who claim to sell immediately will not be punished, but will not be identified as staunch supporters of the optimistic network.
3、One of the important roles of the $OP token is governance. Holding the token and participating in the governance of the network is the best expression of support for the optimistic network. Holding tokens without participating in governance, or entrusting governance voting to others, cannot effectively contribute to decentralized governance


a) “Repeat Optimism Users” refers to users who continue to participate in on-chain activities on the Optimism Network at different time periods, such as at least one on-chain activity every week (monthly), which can more effectively reward active on-chain users
b) Claiming an airdrop, but not selling it, can be seen as a firm user of the optimistic network’s users. Delegating voting rights to yourself and participating in governance is to contribute to the optimistic network. The two have different meanings, so I divided them into two options.
c) Regarding “more than 3 interactions in the Optimism ecosystem”, please forgive my bad English, this expression means: reward those users who have participated in the Optimism ecosystem more than 3 times, rather than simply transferring money on the chain.

1 Like

I don’t think doing something by myself is the same as entrusting someone else to do something according to other people’s ideas.
Because you participate in it yourself, you have more initiative; and entrust others to do it according to other people’s wishes, can you guarantee that his choice is the same as yours?

What you said also makes sense. It appears that your mindset is more flexible and beneficial; a contrast to holding $OP and not selling. One is a staunch Holder and the other is contributing to on-chain activity. So I suggest to use the form of scoring, different contributions to different points, and then accumulate rewards according to the total score, which can more effectively reward real and contributing users

In total, about 30M OP have been delegated, and anyone who has delegated is a voting participant, if there was no possibility to delegate someone else to vote on your behalf, then even fewer would vote. There is no difference, they are equal voting participants.


what do you think about flagging the addresses that claimed the token before it was officially announced ?

1 Like