Author: FIP Crypto

Compile: DeepTide TechFlow

The Tides of Depth: In the current environment where airdrops are becoming increasingly competitive and points-based systems are widespread, many investors have fallen into a state of "activity fatigue." This article proposes a counterintuitive airdrop strategy: the best airdrops are not achieved by grinding for points, but rather by genuinely engaging with on-chain activities and stumbling upon them by chance.

By analyzing cases from projects like Monad, ZKsync, and Base, the author reveals the core logic behind retroactive airdrops: project teams value meaningful on-chain footprints that generate real value, rather than mechanical "sybil" behaviors. If you feel that airdrop rewards are being diluted, this article will teach you how to build genuine on-chain reputations to achieve efficient and low-effort "hodling" profits.

The main text is as follows:

Not all airdrops require endless "grinding," and those that don't require hard grinding are often the highest quality ones.

I've tried various types of airdrops, and many of them have left me completely exhausted.

But I realized that the smartest way to get airdrops is actually not to deliberately "farm" for them.

The following is the strategy I am currently employing, aimed at achieving the highest reward with the least effort "unexpectedly":

We earn rewards by being active on-chain.

Not every project does this, but some projects allocate airdrops to active on-chain users.

Here are some examples of past retroactive airdrops:

• TIA and DYM: Rewards were given to Cosmos ecosystem stakers and active L2 users.
• AVAIL: Rewards are given to active L2 users, including Starknet users.
• PENGU: The rewards were given to wallets with strong and active records on Ethereum and Solana.
• MegaETHSBT's eligibility is based on our on-chain contributions.
• Monad is a concept from: Rewards were given to key traders and depositors of top protocols on Ethereum and Solana (they defined these users as those who have provided significant value on-chain).

Follow @Zeneca The philosophy of airdrops is that as long as we maintain an open mind and explore new things on the blockchain, airdrops will naturally come our way.

Our footprints allow us to be eligible for different airdrops simply by interacting with preferred protocols.

A points program with clear criteria is boring because the project will directly tell you how to farm them.

One of the most "notorious" projects is MarginFi, which ran a points program for months (or even years?) without ever announcing any token information.

But this is the trap of any points program:

Nothing is promised to you, and the activities can go on forever.

They can change the rules anytime they want, and that's the game we're playing in.

If the sole purpose of a project is to hard launch for an airdrop, many people will feel frustrated.

When we have too high expectations for airdrop rewards:

We will face great disappointment.

Such programs are also vulnerable to severe manipulation by Sybils, which can further dilute the allocation.

At the same time, the retroactive airdrop will not publicly share its criteria.

We can compare the standards used by two different L2s:

• ZKsync is a Layer 2 scaling solution for Ethereum that uses zero It uses the Time-Weighted Average Balance (TWAB), but it is only disclosed after the snapshot.
• Scroll Marks points have been used in multiple activities.

Both use similar factors (liquidity) to determine eligibility.

But besides being beneficial to the whales, Scroll hasn't performed well, while ZKsync actually offers quite substantial returns if you have the right strategy.

Many people are still angry about losing their ZKsync eligibility, but in fact, even with a small amount of funds, we could have qualified.

When there is so much uncertainty, no one likes to go for airdrops.

The ideal scenario is something like Base or Arbitrum:

They actively denied that they would issue tokens until they changed their minds and decided to issue one.

Therefore, fewer active wallets will participate, as those who are only chasing incentives will not join.

Or they might give up halfway because, from a return on investment (ROI) perspective, it makes no sense to work on this project.

The fifth airdrop from Optimism was a big surprise to me. The results showed that only 54,723 wallets were eligible.

Many people will take a wait-and-see attitude, asking whether it is worth engaging if there are no guarantees.

But the real reward comes from uncertainty:

We take the risk of investing our time and capital based on our own beliefs—it could be a failure, or it could be a rewarding investment.

Even if we encounter failure, it can help us further optimize our strategies and understand what to avoid in the future.

I've been asked countless times which are the best petting projects.

We are always looking for the next mine, and then the next one after selling it.

But sometimes, the best airdrop strategy is simply to use the product you like.

Who would have thought that staying active on Aave or Uniswap could get us an airdrop from Monad?

I've often felt completely exhausted from constantly searching for the next Alpha.

But if we can earn rewards based on our on-chain footprints:

A true Alpha is interacting with protocols that we enjoy using and can profit from in the process.

Overemphasis on the final outcome can lead to disappointment.

And receiving surprise airdrops will keep us motivated to continue exploring the blockchain.

The witch farm pretends to be real people by performing the most basic operations to gain qualifications.

There will always be witches trying to extract value from the project.

However, projects using retroactive standards can adjust the rules to exclude witches.

Of course, these are never perfect:

• Real users may be mistakenly filtered out.
• Some witches will receive assignments.

It's hard to balance between the two; someone will always be left out.

On our end, we can try our best not to be filtered out as witches.

It all begins with this principle:

The retroactive airdrop is distributed based on the value provided by your wallet.

Monad describes it as an "address that has generated significant value on-chain across different value forms in history."

If the tasks we do are as low-value as those of witches:

We would be labeled and lose our qualifications.

The project team does not want to reward bots that repeatedly perform the same low-value swaps.

On the contrary, they will reward high-value feedback.

However, there are no strict rules about this; project teams can decide on their own which behaviors they want to reward.

Therefore, to qualify, we only need to find an app we like and use it consistently.

Our footprints will be recognized by other projects, and we will also be rewarded for using our preferred applications.

On-chain footprints have been declared dead by many, but I still believe they will play a key role in future airdrops.

Even though the current airdrop heavily favors social distribution:

Footprints on the blockchain still form the foundation of trust in your social reputation.

Others can easily tell whether you're faking or genuinely involved, so there's no point in trying to lie.

You just need to describe what you have done on the chain to increase your "luck surface area."