@harrisonzzc

Some ecosystems use a points leaderboard to determine airdrop allocation, which can be fair if the scoring system is transparent and prevents manipulation. It rewards users who actively engage with the project, creating stronger community participation. However, it may also encourage spammy or superficial activity, as users chase points rather than providing meaningful contributions. Projects must carefully design rules to discourage bots and ensure value-added interactions are prioritized. Weighted scoring that considers both quantity and quality of actions can create a balanced system. While fair in theory, it risks alienating smaller participants who feel disadvantaged against whales or power users. For long-term growth, combining leaderboards with random allocations can reward genuine users while preventing exploitation by those who only farm rewards strategically without long-term interest.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction