Original | Odaily Planet Daily
Author | Nan Zhi
The witch review work of LayerZero is still in full swing. According to LayerZero co-founder Bryan Pellegrino, the final list of witch addresses is expected to be announced by the end of June. Today, Bryan answered questions on the review and processing methods of witch attacks and low-value transactions on the X platform in a Q&A format, as compiled by Odaily Planet Daily.
Review criteria and ultimate goals
Before answering user questions, Bryan Pellegrino first defined what constitutes spam transactions (referred to as low-value transactions in this article) and how to handle and incentivize these transactions. The original text is as follows:
Here is how we are currently considering qualifications from a broad perspective. The focus is clearly on authentic users and the most fair, widely distributed, highly consistent, and enduring users.
To a large extent, this is inspired by the results of the witch process, and any true final definition will come directly from LayerZero, not from me.
If there are 6 million initial wallets and 3 million wallets have less than 5 transactions, then these wallets will be seriously considered. All transactions under $1.00 are discounted by 80%, but still calculated at 1/5 of normal transactions, as are all “worthless NFTs.”
Here, a worthless NFT is defined as having a “market value” or “total transaction volume” less than 0.00001 ETH. For example, transactions like Gas drop are also considered valid transactions.
Transactions are then normalized based on specific protocol fees (rather than fees on the underlying blockchain where the transaction occurs). The lowest value of the processed data is the qualification standard, while there is also an upper limit. Finally, a multiplier will be obtained based on early usage.
In summary: eliminating witches, eliminating spam transactions, semi-linear rewards with upper limit cap, rewarding early users, rewarding loyal users, and rewarding all non-standard protocol interactions such as LP through RFP.
(QA format
Bryan Pellegrino answered specific detail questions one by one, with key points summarized as follows:
Incentives for liquidity providers
Q: Liquidity pools are important and should be rewarded. If someone adds LP for more than a week, there is a 99% chance it is not Sybil.
A: The incentives for liquidity providers will be handled by RFP.
Definition and handling of worthless NFTs
Q: Last May, I created an NFT on Holograph, costing me 0.003 ETH. If it is considered a worthless NFT, obviously it has no value. But I like the NFT I created, and I am one of the first to try using L0 cross-chain NFT.
A: These transactions were initiated to use our cross-chain system. If it is easy to distinguish this and the millions of “worthless NFT” transactions, I am happy to do so.
I hope Holograph will reward creators through RFP. That is why we have developed the RFP process.
(Glossary: This type of transaction still falls under “low-value NFTs” and is not directly eligible for a LayerZero airdrop, but may be incentivized through RFP.)
Gas Drop calculation
Q: Honestly, you integrated over 50 chains, but 90% of Refuel fees are less than $1, and each tx value is reduced by 80%. You penalize many users.
A: I think this is a completely valid criticism, and it is one of the reasons I publicly commented. The initial post discussed Stargate and OFT transfers, and each witch cluster we reviewed had countless transactions, ranging from $0.001 to $0.25. I don’t know much about Gas Drop data, but we need to evaluate it.
(Note: Gas Drop, also known as Gas refuel, typically involves topping up Gas fees to other accounts at a low cost. This section implies that Gas Refuel operations will be included in incentives but may be discounted in calculation.)
Discount calculation
Q: If I have about 130 Layerzero transactions, with about 10 worthless NFT transactions, do I apply an 80% discount calculation to the entire address, or only to the 10 worthless transactions?
A: Only those 10 transactions, not all of them.
Definition of worthless NFT
Q: Market value or lifetime traded value at the time of the snapshot
Dealing with worthless NFTs alongside high protocol fees
Q: If I spend fees on transferring worthless NFTs, is the discount calculation applied?
For example, if I transfer 5 worthless NFTs and pay $50 in fees to the protocol, is my fee now $10?
A: Worthless NFTs are 20% of normal transactions, so you can consider a $1 fee now worth $0.20 in the overall model.
What does dweight calculation mean?
Q: What does an 80% dweight mean?
A: The value of a $1 fee for a normal transaction is 1. If you send back and forth across chains for $0.01, each transaction is calculated as 0.01 x 20%.
How are LayerZero contract deployers incentivized?
A: With nearly 60,000 contracts deployed, this is the purpose of building RFP and the reason for dev separation in the RFP process.
(Note: It means that incentives can only be obtained through RFP applications.)
Meaning of protocol fees
Q: If you bridge STG through Stargate, there are no protocol fees?
A: There are no Stargate protocol fees, but there are LayerZero protocol fees (for DVN and executors). This is the meaning of fees, not of Stargate or other applications.
How is transaction volume considered?
Q: Isn’t transaction volume an important part of all the discussions above? Why remove it?
A: Transaction volume is the standard for Stargate RFP or OFT, but from the perspective of LayerZero, all messages are more or less equal. That is why sending $100 or $100,000,000 worth of OFT fees is completely the same.
Q: Think about it, if we give the same value to transfers of $100 and $100,000,000, then even transfers of $0.000001 should have the same weight, because “all messages are more or less equal.”
A: Yes, in an ideal world of equal use, this would not be necessary, especially when there are a large number of low-value transactions in the range of $0.001 – $0.20 just spinning in place, as well as many worthless NFT transactions just to generate tx. I believe anything with a reasonable purpose should be considered a normal transaction, and anything “obviously” inorganic should have its weight reduced.
Conclusion
In summary, transactions below $1 and NFT transactions valued below 0.00001 ETH will be considered low-value transactions (Spam). When calculating incentives, their weight is reduced to 20%, but this does not affect the weight calculation of other normal transactions. Finally, semi-linear distribution with an upper bound cap will be based on the protocol fees paid.
Additionally, early users will receive additional incentives, and non-standard LayerZero transactions such as providing liquidity will be handled separately through RFP.
