ZKsync is willful, airdrops have entered an era of no rules
It seems that project parties of star projects have begun to treat airdrops as a power of resource allocation, which can be used arrogantly without bearing consequences, and airdrops are no longer a mutual fulfillment between community users and project parties.Author: Mia, ChainCatcher
Editor: Marco, ChainCatcher
The way projects and communities in the crypto space used to interact with pride is now facing a crisis.
Interaction, on-chain contributions, and receiving airdrops were once the hallmarks of the crypto world.
After numerous airdrop rules, ZKsync struck a blow to this traditional interaction method that balances trust with a statement: "All decisions related to airdrop distribution are made solely by the ZKsync Association."
Previously, the co-founder of Taiko also claimed in response to "airdrop" skepticism: "The lack of transparency in the rules is because transparency cannot resolve disputes."
Star projects seem to increasingly treat airdrops as a power of resource allocation—something they can use arrogantly without bearing consequences, rather than a mutual benefit between community users and project parties.
We are concerned that the decentralized, transparent, and fair spirit of crypto is fading away.
Only One-Tenth of Addresses Receive Airdrops
Since last month's LayerZero anti-witch hunt airdrop setback, the "hair-pulling" community has suffered another defeat.
On June 11, ZKsync announced that it would conduct an airdrop next week and open airdrop queries, finally providing answers after four years of interaction. The official disclosure revealed that there are a total of 695,000 eligible addresses on the ZKsync chain, accounting for about 10% of the total 6.827 million, far below the previously predicted range of 2.05 million to 2.9 million addresses in the TrustGo report.
According to community statistics, 9,203 addresses received 23.9% of the total airdrop amount.
After a four-year wait, what users received was an empty promise, with many showcasing their unfortunate total losses on X.
ZKsync, with its star founders and star capital halo, has always been the white moonlight for the "hair-pulling" community.
A prominent community figure stated, "Some have quit their jobs to do ZKs, some have sold their homes to do ZKs, some have taken out loans to do ZKs; they have forever lost the qualification to scale up, and have completely failed." It feels like a betrayal after a four-year relationship, "after paying three years' salary and countless warm nights," only to see the goddess ZKS leave.
Association Decides Airdrop
For regular airdrops, the core criteria typically revolve around interaction activity, duration, and funding levels. However, ZKsync's airdrop rules set seven thresholds:
- Conditions for the Era mainnet require interaction with 10 non-token smart contracts.
- Payment users on the Era mainnet must have conducted at least 5 transactions.
- Users must have traded 10 ERC-20 tokens on the Era mainnet.
- Users must have provided any liquidity to tracked DEX and lending protocols on the Era mainnet.
- Must hold at least one Lamp NFT.
- Must have been active on ZKsync Lite for over 3 months before the mainnet.
- Must have donated to Gitcoin through rounds on ZKsync Lite.
Such excessively strict rules are not surprising in the ever-changing "hair-pulling" market, but a single airdrop clause has thrown the project into a whirlpool of criticism over rule transparency.
ZKsync stated on the airdrop claim interface, "Meeting one or more of the above airdrop criteria does not imply a legal right or claim to receive an airdrop; all decisions related to airdrop distribution are made solely by the ZKsync Association."
This statement sparked dissatisfaction among community users, with many expressing doubts.
One crypto community user stated, "We can understand the strictness of the airdrop rules, but we cannot tolerate the project party's reckless arbitrariness."
This clause completely removes the determination of airdrop eligibility from the airdrop criteria, making it seem that whether one can receive an airdrop depends entirely on the project's mood.
Additionally, ZKsync also stated that addresses that meet the airdrop criteria but have fewer than 450 tokens will have their allocated tokens reclaimed, which has also caused dissatisfaction among some small users.
"Insider Trading" Controversy
Although the time frame is long and the tasks required are numerous, community users have maintained high expectations for ZKsync. If the rules are strict or involve some non-traditional practices, they still fall within the community's acceptable range. However, a series of perplexing actions taken by ZKsync recently has led to increasing doubts and criticisms from community members.
With nearly 10% of eligible airdrop addresses, it means that most of the token shares remain in the hands of the project party. Many users have questioned this, believing that ZKsync's move is essentially to reduce market liquidity and secretly hide insider trading. In response, ZKsync has remained deaf to users' various doubts and has not made any positive comments.
On the contrary, as the insider trading controversy escalated, Nansen, responsible for ZKsync's data review, began to actively distance itself.
Nansen officially stated on X, "In the spirit of transparency, we want to clarify some misunderstandings about the ZKsync airdrop. We did provide some specific wallet cluster data to Matter Labs, such as whales or known scammers. However, we did not assist ZKsync in conducting witch hunts, nor did we provide advice on airdrop distribution."
Additionally, the NFT trading platform Element stated on X that as the largest NFT market on ZKsync, the platform did not receive any ZK token airdrops.
All criticism is directed at ZKsync itself.
Every airdrop comes with both joy and sorrow, and many have indeed received airdrops. Various airdrop screenshots have started to circulate online, seemingly trying to prove to the public that "ZKsync's airdrop is fair and effective; it's just that you don't meet the requirements."
Bankless co-founder David Hoffman also began to publicly support ZKsync, stating that based on survey data obtained from Discord, most people expressed overall satisfaction with the ZKsync airdrop, and he also classified the criticisms on X as bot comments.
Meanwhile, the "native ZKsync project" Zyfi announced on social media that it received 1.642 million ZK tokens, indirectly confirming the effectiveness of the airdrop.
However, most professional "hair-pulling" parties in the Chinese-speaking community have suffered total losses, with most studios once again becoming mere tools.
Anti-Insider Trading Action
As the number of airdrop addresses sharply decreases and the insider trading controversy escalates, the Anti-Insider Trading Alliance has emerged.
The ZKsync ecological NFT project zkApes announced on social media that it has formed an alliance with projects like Element, Argent, and WOOFi, aiming to pressure ZK Nation and Matter Labs to resist insider trading and other behaviors.
So, will the dual pressure from ecological projects and users force ZKsync to make new airdrop decisions?
The answer is twofold: if they accept the pressure and choose to reform, ZKsync would undoubtedly be acknowledging the existence of insider trading; but if they continue to maintain the status quo, the ZKsync ecosystem is likely to lose a large portion of users and developers.
In the airdrop arena, the relationship between project parties and "hair-pulling" parties has always been one of mutual competition. However, if the balance of power tips in favor of either side, it will jeopardize the interests of the other. When the scales tip toward the project party, allowing them to act arbitrarily, the "hair-pulling" parties become mere tools.
From the recent Taiko to LayerZero, it has become common to criticize project parties for not meeting airdrop expectations; the transparency of airdrop rules should be a top priority in the decentralization process of projects.
