@franceshamilton
Airdrop frameworks sometimes weight allocations toward larger holders because stake often signals commitment and aligns incentives; staking and liquidity provision commonly translate into higher multipliers. However, many projects intentionally counterbalance this by rewarding diverse participation, retroactive usage, or task-based contributions to avoid centralization. Anti-sybil and fairness mechanisms—capped per-wallet allocations, reputation weighting, and non-transferable badges—dilute pure size biases. In practice, institutional-scale holders may receive significant allocations when distribution correlates with stake or TVL, while grassroots participation gets rewarded via breadth and activity. Reviewing allocation rules clarifies whether big wallets or distributed contributors will benefit more.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction