Original｜Odaily

Author｜Azuma

Starknet’s airdrop plan has once again ignited the community’s enthusiasm for discussing the top Layer 2 airdrop expectations. With the “boot landing” of the former, the community’s focus has naturally shifted to other Layer 2s that have not yet determined their airdrop plans. Among them, The veteran zk-Rollup network zkSync, once known as the Four Kings together with Arbitrum, Optimism, and Starknet, will undoubtedly be the focus of the communitys attention.

In the days after Starknet officially announced the airdrop, many zkSync team members frequently talked about the airdrop design on social media, and those who participated in the discussion even included Sebastien, the DeFi business leader who has a strong voice in the zkSync team.

Although these individual discussions do not represent the collective attitude of the entire zkSync team, their words give us a window into potential zkSync airdrops.

On February 16, frogmonkee, whose Linkedin profile shows that he is a member of the zkSync team, published a long article on Community comments selected by frogmonkee include: Starknet has done a good job in giving back to stakers and developers, but its standard design and distribution design are questionable;The community really loves Arbitrum’s airdrop and hates Paraswap’s airdrop (which has the same minimum balance requirement as Starknet); poor anti-witch design may lead to “the baby being thrown out with the bathwater”;Project parties need more public relations skills and maintain clearer communication with the community...

After frogmonkee posted the article, Sebastien forwarded the article and immediately launched multiple community surveys on X to collect feedback.

February 16,Sebastien asked at

On the same day, Sebastien also posted:The points-based airdrop is not perfect and has attracted a lot of criticism, but it can at least provide users with some clarity and make it easier for them to manage their expectations.

Subsequently, Sebastien launched a multiple-choice survey on X.Ask the community whether they prefer an equal airdrop (lower standards, everyone gets a similar amount of airdrops) or a calculated airdrop (designing hundreds of detailed standards, each detailed standard will be checked separately and accumulated share, the amount of airdrops received by each person may vary greatly).In the end, 78.1% of users chose to side with the “account-based airdrop”.

On February 17, Sebastien asked several questions again.Ask the community for their opinions on questions like “what is the best airdrop”, “what is fair”, etc.

Perhaps Arbitrum’s airdrop design has been mentioned too many times.frogmonkee and Sebastien then sent out a special post to ask the community for a better analysis of the Arbitrum airdrop.

On February 19, frogmonkee once again published a summary article. frogmonkee mentioned in the article,“Witches” and “farmers (mining users)” are not enemies. They are also evangelists of the community, bringing liquidity, providing usage feedback, and conducting organic publicity... The community prefers simple, reasonable, and inclusive airdrop standards. Arbitrum’s airdrop is remembered because it can flexibly adjust the share according to time, number, and magnitude.

frogmonkee also mentioned that regarding the design of detailed standards,As Sebastien said, hundreds may be too many. He personally prefers to use simple standards to determine the basic share, and then add corresponding multipliers based on some detailed standards... It is also recommended for addresses suspected of being witches. Reduce the share through multipliers to avoid large-scale accidental injuries caused by killing with one stick.

Based on what Sebastien and frogmonkee said above,We can roughly guess,zkSyncs airdrop standards are still being designed, and the team may be looking for a fairer solution to avoid the situation like Starknet, which was criticized by a large number of accidentally injured users after the airdrop.

It is noteworthy that,Since Arbitrum’s airdrop design has been mentioned many times in community interactions, it is not ruled out that zkSync’s final design plan will refer to Arbitrum., that is, the share allocation will be adjusted based on a variety of detailed standards, which may widen the share gap between minimum guarantee accounts and premium accounts.

Finally, it should be emphasized that the above content is only our speculation based on the speeches of Sebastien and frogmonkee. Their opinions do not completely represent the attitude of the entire zkSync team. The final plan is still subject to the announcement through official channels.