How exactly is MegaETH allocating the public sale shares?

Original Title: How is MegaETH distributing its public sale shares?

Original author: MegaETH

Original source:

Reprint: Mars Finance

Handling a sale that was oversubscribed by 28 times and had over 53,000 participants is not as easy as it sounds. In my previous article, I mentioned that this sale mainly focused on two groups:

· A former active member of the MegaETH community

· We believe that those who will accompany MegaETH for a long time

A few days before the sale ended, @artemis_onchain (our data lead) and I met in Istanbul to start extensive simulations. We tried many different methods to “perfectly” measure everyone’s contributions, but quickly realized that it was impossible to do so in such a short time, as “contribution” is a multidimensional concept.

So we decided to split the problem into two parts:

· Fairly distributed to existing community members

· Establish a data-driven scoring and allocation system for long-term investors

The following sections of this article will detail how we achieved these two goals and the results we ultimately reached.

Allocation for existing community members

For the first allocation pool - our existing community, we adopted the most traditional method: manual allocation.

We have compiled a list based on our existing community infrastructure, including @Heisenbruh and our moderator network, covering members who have been continuously and deeply involved since MegaETH exited stealth mode.

This list includes those:

· Early members who joined and have remained active

· People who help shape the project's atmosphere and values.

· Those who continue to support us during bear markets and periods of silence.

· Those who provide feedback, signals, and energy before there are tokens available for speculation.

It needs to be clarified that most of these people have not chosen to lock their assets. We believe this is perfectly fine. Their contributions have been rewarded through time, attention, and trust. In our view, they have “put in the effort.”

In the spirit of transparency, we hereby announce the list of sales participants that we believe represent the core community over the past few years.

We know that this list cannot be perfect, and there are definitely some people who have been left out. If you are one of them, I am truly sorry.

Besides this group of community members and application developers who choose a one-year lock-up period, others are not personally selected by the team.

Even among this group of members selected by the team, not everyone received the full allocation, and the disparity is quite significant.

Due to the limitations of sales scale and market demand, we had to make some trade-offs. However, we believe that this approach respects those who have supported us all the way while also avoiding turning the entire sale into a pure “popularity contest.”

Compared to the results of algorithmic automatic allocation, these users generally have higher quotas. Apart from the application developers mentioned earlier, most participants have non-locked shares.

Measure long-term investors

The second allocation pool is aimed at users who participate in the sale through a public sale process, as well as those who may become long-term holders of MegaETH.

In this section, we hope to adopt a more systematic approach. We have designed a scoring mechanism that takes into account the following dimensions:

· On-chain activity

· Social Signals and Natural Exposure

· Specific interaction with MegaETH

· Will participation be regarded as a long-term investment (for example, willing to lock up for one year)

Our goal is not to reward “score boosting players”, but to identify true participants who have genuine beliefs as much as possible.

Evaluation indicators

We used four different indicators in the overall rating system:

Moni scores are used as:

· A basic filtering condition

· A component of social scoring

For example:

· My Moni score is approximately 7,000

· @artemis_onchain's Moni score is approximately 300

Based on this distribution, we believe that setting the Moni score at 50 is a reasonable minimum threshold in most cases. It is not a perfect measure of user quality, but it still serves as a useful reference line in distinguishing completely blank accounts from users who have at least some level of activity.

We also discuss and apply alternatives to social verification in the following text.

On-chain activity score consists of multiple dimensions, each with different weights. The overall design is as follows:

· Early Participation (15%): Represents early adopters and those willing to take risks.

· OG qualifications (15%): Long-term participation record in the entire crypto ecosystem.

· Asset holding situation (15%): A reference for financial investment and “real money” participation.

· NFT Activity (7.5%): A reflection of current on-chain activity, especially through participation in NFTs.

· Recent activity (15%): Not just past participation, but more focus on recent on-chain behavior.

· MegaETH related activities (32.5%): including CAP scores, MEGA NFT holdings, and participation records directly related to MegaETH such as specific testnet behaviors.

The social scoring integrates multiple dimensions:

· Moni score

· Kaito Data

· Other reference information (such as [ ] and Ethos), for manual review

We did not rely on a single metric, but rather used multiple tools in combination. This approach helped us effectively eliminate obvious bots and low-quality spam accounts, while also better identifying genuine participants who are truly integrated into the community.

Mega Score is a participation signal specifically for MegaETH, including:

· CAP score

· MEGA NFT holding status

· Specific testnet behavior

We use Mega Score in two aspects:

1. As part of the on-chain activity scoring

2. As a basis for certain screening thresholds, ensure that users who truly participate in MegaETH are not pushed out of the allocation range by the general on-chain behavior of “Farmers”.

Why is locking up important?

We placed a high weight on whether to choose to lock up $MEGA for one year.

In our view, being willing to lock up funds for a year in a highly volatile market is a manifestation of strong conviction. No one can predict what will happen tomorrow, and choosing to lock up for a year expresses: “I am not here for short-term trading; I am here to participate in the long term.”

Participant screening and allocation process

After completing the scoring, we still need to decide on two things:

1. Who can enter the allocation list

2. How to convert scores into actual allocation quotas

We divide the process into two categories:

· Lockup Participants

· Non-locked participants

For users who choose to lock their assets, they must meet at least one of the following conditions to be considered:

· Moni score is higher than 50

· On-chain score higher than 200

· Mega Score shows that you hold more than one Fluffle NFT

In other words, you need to have at least one of the following:

· Basic social activity level

· Clear on-chain behavior signals

· Strong MegaETH participation record

After applying these screening criteria, approximately 29.4% of the locked addresses entered the allocation list, which is about 1,000 addresses.

Once the wallet passes the screening, its allocation amount will be determined based on the final score, which integrates on-chain and social signals. We adopt a segmented continuous curve approach that ensures a minimum allocation while providing higher rewards to high-scoring users.

The specific allocation logic is as follows:

· Top 5%: Linear decrease, allocation ratio from 100% to 95%

· The next 3% (5%-8%): a rapid decline from 95% to 55%

· The next 7% (from 8% to 15%): continue to decrease, from 55% to 35%

· Remaining 85%: exponentially decreasing, with a minimum allocation of 25%

Non-lockup addresses must meet any of the following conditions to be eligible for the allocation list:

· Moni score > 200

· Social score > 200

· On-chain score > 300

· Mega Score > 68 (which means holding at least one Fluffle)

As long as you are active on the chain, have strong social signals, or have a notable participation record on MegaETH, you are eligible to participate without needing to meet all conditions simultaneously.

The actual screening result is: Among 49,976 non-locked participants, a total of 5,031 wallets passed the screening, with an acceptance rate of approximately 10.1%. Even the lowest allocation amount faces fierce competition. We trust the judgment of the algorithm and are clearly aware that even if some users have substantial activity and holdings on MegaETH, they may still be excluded if other indicators are weak. However, this is a fair mechanism, and we respect the results.

In the filtered list, we rank the wallets based on their comprehensive scores and decide their allocation ratio accordingly.

The higher the ranking, the higher the allocation ratio. As the ranking decreases, the allocation ratio gradually decreases. After reaching a certain ranking, the curve tends to flatten, and the remaining users receive a uniform minimum allocation.

Small bid and high score protection mechanism

We have noticed that some small bidders are ranked equally with large bidders. To ensure fairness, we have set up a mechanism: the actual allocation amount for any participant must not be lower than the 5 addresses adjacent to their ranking.

For example, @thedefinvestor ranks in the top 15 among non-locked participants, but his bid is not high. By percentage distribution, he should have received a smaller allocation. Meanwhile, his neighbor, who bid the full amount, received a higher allocation.

In order to affirm @thedefinvestor's high ranking performance, we have raised his allocation to a level close to that of his neighbors. This is also part of the source of the 100% allocation ratio.

Case 1: Low social score, high on-chain score

@cp0xdotcom has almost no presence on Twitter and has never tweeted about MegaETH, so his social score is very low. However, he still ranks in the top 20 among all participants and has received 92% of his locked bid.

His advantages are:

· Over 8 years of on-chain history

· Consumed 194 ETH of gas

· Early participation in multiple contracts that later gained widespread adoption.

· Interacted with 3,490 independent contracts

· In the past 180 days, there have been 164 days active on the mainnet.

· No NFT and no MegaETH related activities.

His case demonstrates that even without social or MegaETH support, as long as one performs excellently on-chain, they can still achieve a high ranking.

Case 2: Low on-chain rating, high social rating

@nics_off is almost the opposite of the above cases. He has a wallet on-chain history of less than two years, with gas consumption of only 1.5 ETH, interacting with about 150 contracts, and a low on-chain score. However, his social score is very outstanding:

· High activity on Twitter

· Ranked 13th in the Kaito MegaETH leaderboard

· A large amount of high-quality MegaETH content has been released.

These factors placed him at 17th among non-locked participants, receiving the highest allocation ratio in this group (20%).

His case also illustrates that having a large number of fans is not enough; the social score is a weighted combination of Moni and Kaito, and the quality of MegaETH-related content is far more important than the number of fans.

We see many similar cases at the top of the leaderboard, particularly worth mentioning is:

· @barthazian: Ranked first among all users, performing excellently across all metrics.

· @0xMaxBT: Known as the legend of the MegaETH testnet, he is the only participant (among 53,000 people) who completed all the testnet contract interactions.

Sybil attack prevention mechanism

We have adopted multiple layers of Sybil protection measures:

1. Sybil cluster reports from the community and external teams (such as Bubble Maps and Echo) as direct screening criteria.

2. Our scoring system itself is also not friendly to Sybil. To achieve a high score, the wallet must have real and credible on-chain behavior, and low-quality associated addresses often cannot pass.

3. We have found that some wallets or social media accounts are linked to multiple KYC bids. Once such patterns are detected, all related requests will be invalidated.

4. For wallets that have been allocated, we will continue to conduct Sybil checks, and if malicious behavior is detected, we reserve the right to refund.