After more than a month of witch purging activities, the LayerZero Foundation today announced on the X platform that the air investment qualification inquiry page has been launched. However, the results of the airdrop caused many users to "break their defenses".
As one of the most anticipated potential airdrop projects in the community, LayerZero’s airdrop had high hopes, and people were looking forward to a “big” airdrop. However, as the witch purging activities unfolded, a large number of studio and even ordinary user accounts were reported as witch accounts. In the end, after working hard for more than half a year, they found nothing.
As the only two large-scale airdrop projects that have received the same attention as Zksync recently, LayerZero has caused quite a controversy. While users have questioned the "sincerity" of the project team, they have also questioned whether new tokens will be born in the current industry. The distribution paradigm raises considerations.
Before that, we need to first understand what witch purges are.
LayerZero was founded in November 2021, during the bull market of the blockchain market. With strong capital support and promotion from key opinion leaders in the industry, LayerZero has risen rapidly within a year. The announcement of plans to launch a governance token airdrop generated a lot of buzz within the community. The strong capital background, high project valuation and top status make many people look forward to generous airdrops, which attracts a large number of airdrop hunters. According to data from Dune, the number of interactions on the LayerZero chain has increased significantly since April last year, with the number of transactions in a single day exceeding 200,000 and peaking at 490,000. Such high-frequency interactions not only improve the data performance of the platform, but also bring considerable revenue. For example, Stargate, the first cross-chain DApp on LayerZero, has a monthly revenue of over $1 million, and this is just one product in its ecosystem.
Under such high expectations, the community’s expectations for LayerZero’s airdrop have always been high. Although there are frequent news of airdrops, they are constantly postponed. Finally, on May 2 this year, LayerZero announced on the X platform that the first snapshot had been completed, and market sentiment reached its peak.
According to predictions from WOO X Research, LayerZero’s airdrop value may range from $600 million to $1 billion. A conservative estimate is that if TGE is valued at 4 times and the initial circulation is 15%, the FDV will be US$12 billion, the airdrop value will be approximately US$600 million, and each user is expected to receive US$750 to US$1,500. In an optimistic estimate, if the circulation is 20%, TGE is valued at 4.5 times, FDV is US$13.5 billion, the total airdrop value is expected to reach US$1.08 billion, and each user is expected to receive US$1,350 to US$2,700.
However, just as users were waiting for the airdrop with great anticipation, LayerZero suddenly announced an unexpected news. On May 3, LayerZero announced that in order to ensure the fairness of the airdrop, it would conduct a one-month witch review operation.
Witch censorship is not uncommon in airdrops. Witching usually refers to the behavior of making meaningless or small transactions through a large number of accounts to obtain airdrops. However, this review introduces a new "bounty reporting mechanism." According to the official announcement, the review will be divided into three stages. The first stage is a 14-day self-exposure stage, where users can self-expose their witch behavior, and the official will retain 15% of the airdrop allocation for such accounts; the second stage is the official review stage, where LayerZero will screen according to specific rules and discover Witch accounts will not retain any airdrop quota. The most controversial is the third phase - the bounty reporting phase. From May 18 to May 31, anyone can submit a report on Github. The successful reporter will receive 10% of the airdrop allocation of the person being reported. The remaining 90% will return to the airdrop pool, and those reported will no longer receive any airdrops.
Finally, as LayerZero Labs CEO Bryan Pellegrino stated at X today, a total of 1.28 million qualified addresses; and about 10 million tokens recovered will be returned to real users. The Witch Censorship is over. There were 803,000 addresses identified as potential witches, of which more than 338,000 addresses identified themselves as witches.
When the witch review was over and users were eagerly anticipating the arrival of the airdrop, LayerZero was caught in the Rat Warehouse controversy again. While most users were dissatisfied and ridiculed because of the airdrop results, there were still some users who said they had received a large amount of ZRO tokens. Most of these lucky people hold Kanpai Pandas NFT. For example, an address holding 50 Kanpai Pandas NFTs received 5,335.55 ZRO tokens, while another address starting with 0x816 received 10,000 ZRO tokens for holding 152 NFTs. On average, you will receive approximately 100 ZRO per NFT, with some adjustments based on the rarity of the NFT.
Since the Kanpai Pandas project is not widely known, this has triggered users’ suspicion of the “rat warehouse”. However, according to nftgo data, there is no obvious correlation between the peak transaction volume of Kanpai Pandas and the time of LayerZero airdrop snapshot, and the official Twitter has been operating normally. Therefore, the accusation that Kanpai Pandas has a "rat barn" has not been proven.
At the same time, many users said that they invested a lot of manpower and energy and spent hundreds of dollars, but may only be able to obtain 25 ZRO tokens. Based on the over-the-counter price of $3 a piece, this is far from enough to cover the cost. These users believed that LayerZero’s airdrop was “disingenuous”.
An X user Axel Bitblaze who holds 36 Kanpai Pandas NFTs (approximately 36E) received 10,000 LayerZero (ZRO) airdrops. He posted that the airdrop share given to on-chain users by LayerZero is disappointing: “The top 1% of wallets only get 200-500 tokens, which is simply crazy... My family and I also worked hard to interact, In order to obtain airdrop shares, although we ranked in the top 1%, these interactions only resulted in a small amount of airdrops.”
Some users even believe that the end of Zksync and LayerZero airdrops will become the airdrop EndGame.
Not only the ZRO airdrop, the recent ZK airdrop also caused similar controversy. The number of qualified addresses was far lower than expected, the decision-making process was opaque, the relationship was disowned by Nansen, and suspicious addresses frequently appeared, but the official did not respond directly. This series of operations caused ZK Airdrop to fall into a "rat warehouse" crisis. Previously, AltLayer was also questioned by the community about the existence of a "rat warehouse" because of OG NFT.
The root of the problem lies in the community’s dissatisfaction with the airdrop distribution. Retail investors are unable to determine how to meet the official airdrop standards, and the official "final interpretation right" will only increase the suspicion of opaque operations, resulting in airdrop tokens being allocated to "rats". These "rats" sell the tokens, and retail investors take over, leaving the remaining The continued unlocking of token supply continues to weigh on the market.
In comparison, the airdrop of Uniswap, the earliest representative wall of airdrop, appears to be more transparent and fair. Uniswap officials stated that as long as they have used Uniswap, regardless of whether the exchange is successful or not, everyone can receive 400 UNI airdrops. At the same time, holding UNI can also obtain a series of benefits such as SOCKS tokens.
Although this kind of airdrop without threshold has been criticized, in today's era when airdrop projects are criticized for counterattacks and takeovers, UNI appears to be a successful airdrop case.
Some people believe that the real reason for the strong dissatisfaction caused by ZRO airdrops is that these airdrop project parties have broken the balance between VCs, project parties and "hair-raising" users.
"Fat" users or studios are already the weakest party in the game where VCs push up valuations and spend money wildly. The project side needs user interaction data to attract VC investment, and the VC needs the project side to issue tokens to cash out. The project party uses the promise that it may be turned into tokens in the future to attract "hair-loving" users to work for free for its data growth. But at the same time, there is also a view that whales should not get all the tokens because they invest a lot of capital, but the smallest users should get some basic amount of tokens anyway.
This is also the origin of the widespread anti-institutional sentiment in the current Web3 field, because due to the greed of VCs or poor investment judgments, these projects have obtained ultra-high valuations, but cannot form a reliable and stable business model and can only rely on development. The token trick allows retail investors to pay for its underdigested assets.
But even though the two airdrops of ZK and LayerZero were shocking, for ordinary users, hair removal is still a way to earn income, although the income continues to decline.
Manta Network: Manta token is an OFT token. The team deploys OFT Manta Token on different chains to support cross-chain Manta tokens between multiple chains.
Distribution plan: 10% to developers; 30% to early adopters; 20% to ecosystem partners; 40% to LP providers.
Canto: Canto is a Layer 1 blockchain built using Cosmos SDK. Through LayerZero's OFT standard, CANTO's cross-chain representation is deployed to Ethereum, enabling users to provide liquidity for CANTO and trade CANTO on the main network. , thereby also providing an additional bridge path for Canto.
Distribution plan: 70% will be allocated to CANTO OFT cross-chain users, with a total of at least 50 CANTO to/from Ethereum across the chain, of which 20% will be allocated evenly, 80% will be allocated in proportion to the cross-chain volume; 20% will be allocated to PancakeSwap (Ether CANTO/WETH LP on the (Fang) will be distributed according to the ownership percentage of the liquidity pool at the time of the snapshot; 10% will be distributed to Canto developers.
DappRadar: DappRadar is a DApp data analysis platform.
Distribution plan: 10% allocated to developers; 90% allocated to RADAR stakers.
KelpDAO: KelpDAO is a liquidity re-pledge protocol whose rsETH uses OFT to cross-chain to other L2s.
Allocation plan: 40% allocated to users across chains to various L2s; 20% allocated to users who mint rsETH natively on L2; 20% allocated to the top 500 liquidity providers on mainnet and L2; 10 % allocated to mainnet rsETH holders; 10% allocated to Kelp’s core team to cover developer fees and audits.
Pendle: Pendle is a yield trading protocol.
Distribution plan: 10% allocated to developers; 90% allocated to vependle holders.
The above is the detailed content of LayerZero airdrop caused controversy, has hairdressing come to an end?. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!
![[Web front-end] Node.js quick start](https://img.php.cn/upload/course/000/000/067/662b5d34ba7c0227.png)
