Should Compound Retroactively Airdrop Tokens to Early Users?

You mentionned very good points here
1)the announcement date could probably be the one we take for the reason you mentionned
2)we certainly wanna submit to the vote a socialized, but ALSO a capital weighted reward, however heavily we would weight toward the socialized reward, a la UNISWAP

Finally about your last point " Determine what the per-address amount allocated by the second stream will be." we can use instead the total amount of fees paid+received, it would match the current comp distribution, just an idea here, might be easier than the one you mention

the question is now, how do we get someone to commit to all this work ? clearly it seems neither the founder neither some users rushed to do it, so we might have to find some alternativ, compensation, how do you think ? Maybe we should attach to the proposal a call of DAI reserve to compensate the people making that possible technically to happen


have not heard from this so far.

1 Like

I understand the concern of comp token being announced, but at that time airdrops were not something done, so I dont think that is much of a concern. Thats just, like, my opinion, man.

So i did some digging on dune analytics, its the only solution i’ve seen so far, on how to get some queries on addresses. There is not a way to export those, at least not without paying for a 400.00 pro account. However, they are free to peruse on the site. Here is a link to the dashboard, I have not done queries for all types, and included some baseline minimums just to keep out spam accounts - those are very small, like under 1 dollar or that was my intent anyway.

here is a link to those:

So far its only wbtc, eth, bat and usdt, but that is mostly because I didnt feel like spending more time on something that may not be even be useful. If you did use comp for one of those before June 15, 2020 and want to search for your address to see if it shows up, please do and let me know.

if anyone has an idea of other solutions for running these reports, let me know. I do not have 100 comp to open a CAP but I figure if we get all the data required, we might be that much closer to convincing someone who does to put one in!


I was minted ceth on Jun-05-2019 and cant find my address from COMP-ETH dash

1 Like

That’s not accurate.
my friends are also not found on it


I think solution is in this:

If they want to work on something, let them work on something that users want but are not able to do (technical and capital limitation). However, this thread is the most numerous and has the most comments, and airdrop is needed to decentralize the protocol a bit.


It would be nice if some of the vc founders/funders take a position into this retroactive airdrop/reward. Its seems that the majority of the DeFi space are concluding that rewarding early users could give a major boost into governance. Look only how Badger finance is having a gold era just because the community is so strong.

And its true I may be biased bc I used the protocol in march 2019! But you know why I am in this ethereum space? Because I believe in the community and truly decentralization. I hope Compound dont make the same mistake by only looking to the big pocket / money.


I feel that raining a large sum of money on anyone that happened to use Compound in the past is not an efficient use of the protocol’s capital. The community should align itself with “what is best for ensuring the platform’s future of becoming the global community-owned lending platform?” There is a lot of work to be done and where we are now is just the very beginning. I’m not opposed to a modest degree of financial reward for early users, but I think the bulk of the benefit should mostly come in the form of giving them a powerful voice in the stewardship of Compound. That voice comes through voting power, but that voice doesn’t have to come in the form of unrestricted COMP tokens given away freely.

I propose that the COMP token allocation to early adopters be locked in a voting delegation contract in perpetuity. This contract could allow the early user to vote directly or delegate their votes to others.
The contract could also have the feature to transfer ownership of who controls those votes, which could in the future allow an early adopter to extract value through private sales, if in the future the market deems voting rights on Compound to valuable in-and-of themselves.

This eliminates the immediate financial gain and perverse incentive structure that’s causing a bunch of buzz on this forum from people that stand to gain from raining money. The true stewards of Compound’s future will be able to use this gift to help build its legacy. For those just seeking a short-term financial gain, this gift will be worthless and, if because of that, they choose not to use their votes then that just makes everyone else’s vote more powerful.

Yes, large retroactive airdrops have been popular in the defi space and they create a flurry of publicity within crypto-insider communities, but Compound is already so well established that the marginal benefit seems small. Airdrops aren’t effective beyond this insular community and the majority of the tokens awarded in past airdrops just end up being sold on the market. We need to think much bigger and longer term.

You can think of this perpetual lock as being a burn of Comp tokens, but not the voting right attached to them. The burn of value does enrich existing COMP holders to a marginal degree by decreasing the fully diluted supply, but that’s more than offset by increasing the attractiveness of future COMP emissions and grants. In my opinion, grants are a much more effective use of the protocol’s capital in pursuit of its long-term goals.

Locking the Comp rewards those who came early and truly care about this project in the purest form.


Here’s one reason why a vested airdrop of 100 comp should take place, right now when VC’s vote it’s pretty much already set decision.


Is any result on retroactively airdrop ?

1 Like

The question is that normal users now have nearly no voting weight to change the result of a proposal.The protocol is controlled by a few citadels. Airdrop can distribute more comp into user’s hand but not these citadels and it will make the protocol more decentralised.


That is the big problem for Compound, I think its more CeFi then DeFi currently. I hope that protocol will be more decentralized in future


I say yes to an initial airdrop of COMP tokens to early users but only through using some sort of “claim” mechanism. Also, the COMP not claimed by those users/addresses could still be airdropped to users who interacted with Compound after the launch of the COMP token, but before the initial airdrop. Those users would also have to “claim” their airdrop.

My ETH address here: Address 0xe84d25b1C4fe0E5A9bEe95934AB24C9867Aac2cc | Etherscan was created using Coinbase Wallet, however, I have lost the keys to this wallet and the address will always be earning interest on $360 worth of USDC, LOL! This is the reason I believe the early adopters should have to claim their airdrop and the amount of COMP not claimed be airdropped to addresses that are currently supporting the protocol.

Airdropping COMP to early adopters and not current supporters could be a mistake. As early adopters may not have any use for a governance token, besides monetary value, which means they’ll most likely dump the COMP as soon as they claim it. Current supporters of the Compound protocol would most likely use the COMP for voting or supply it to Compound.

Just my 2 cents.


how did it go in this topic for retroactively airdrop ?
there are many defi platforms airdrop done …remain us.


If compound/coinbase lasts for the next 500 years and you get an average of 5% on that 360 USDC. You will have 14 Trillion Dollar in the year 2521.


Justin Sun (founder of TRON) added usd worth of ETH in Compound. He is now farming 80.000 COMP a day!!!

Well… we could have done this job (give governance to early users) but yet the VCs and other whales waited until this governance attack happened. Justin is not going to use it for Compound or Ethereum, he have is own agenda focused around his true bad blockchain Tron.

Anyhow… compound is moving slow, governance to early users with a vested/locked time could make this protocol more open.

Happy easter, enjoy governance attack


This is a serious problem


I was inspired by @grasponcrypto’s effort with the Dune Analytics data to see if I could put together a more flexible tool for us to gather detailed info on early users of the Compound protocol to help move this discussion forward. I’ve played around with the Compound Subgraph but haven’t found a way to extract all the data we need that way, so I’m using the web3 Python module to scan the blockchain for cToken interactions directly.

A first attempt is posted here.

This tool has been spot-tested on a few randomly-selected blocks bearing cToken interactions but hasn’t been run over the full range of relevant blocks yet: I don’t have access to a local ethereum node or the funds for a remote/paid service for the remote procedure calls (RPCs), so I cannot loop over all relevant blocks to produce an exhaustive list of addresses.

A possible next step would be to start a conversation in the grants channel on Discord and see if some funds to cover the RPCs, or an ethereum full node, could be made available to run the script and collect the data, which we could then analyze together to develop a robust proposal.

I welcome comments, suggestions, and pull requests, especially any ideas for reducing the number of required RPCs. As currently implemented, the script needs to have a peek at every ethereum transaction that took place between the deployment of the first cToken contract and the deployment of the COMP token contract.

Like many in the conversation here, I am a small-potatoes early user with a completely unrelated day job who appreciates the enormous amount of labor that has gone into the protocol’s development and believes that empowering early users with a greater voice in governance will be a net benefit to the project.


Is the proposal still alive ?

1 Like

Thanks to @blck for pointing me toward web3’s, I no longer need to loop over all transactions and can obtain all the metadata on early users we should need with a very modest number of RPCs. @blck also pointed out that my first attempt ignored V1 users (!) I think I’ve rectified that with the new version.

Here is the updated tool

I’ve also posted the resulting information in csv format, separately for V1 and for V2:

Compound V1 Early User List (36942 txs by 28021 unique addresses)
Compound V2 Early User List (254436 txs by 218725 unique addresses)

I think/hope this is moving us in the direction of what @getty had in mind by:

I didn’t provide headers, but you’ll see in the lists that each row contains the block height, user address, type of interaction with the Compound protocol, amount of tokens, and underlying token ID (cashtag) for each transaction. Also, I didn’t remove duplicate addresses: if you interacted with the protocol several times, there should be a separate line for each transaction.

As a first sanity check, it would be awesome if the folks who didn’t see their addresses in @grasponcrypto’s Dune Analytics results could check these outputs and see if they’re listed here.

As a next step, I would suggest we slice the data in a few of the different ways that have been suggested on this forum already. Here are a few of the ways I noticed:

1. (UNI-like or socialized distribution style) equal distribution to all early user addresses

  • with or without a minimum value threshhold (what value?)
  • with or without a bonus multiplier for V1 users (what multiplier?)

2. (COMP-like or capital-weighted distribution style) pro-rata distribution based on (value supplied+borrowed)*(time)

  • how should early liquidators be included in a pro-rata distribution, if at all? They lack the “time” axis that suppliers and borrowers have.

3. Pro-rata distribution based only on total value supplied, borrowed, and liquidated, not based on time.

  • for either 2 or 3, should the pro-rata distribution be rescaled to elevate small early users relative to early whales? I have seen quadratic scaling suggested; or we could take an even more aggressive exponential scaling, where the amount received grows linearly with each order of magnitude of value supplied to, and/or borrowed from, the protocol.

The script does not currently access the price data that would be needed for distribution styles 2 and 3. If someone else wants to add that piece to the puzzle, feel free to submit a pull request! Otherwise I’ll take a stab at it, but again this isn’t really my wheelhouse so it might take me a while.

What do folks think? Are there other ways of slicing the data you’d like to see? Can we narrow it down to one or two of these options before producing the actual list of addresses and distribution amounts for a proposal?

Last but not least, will we be able to pull together enough COMP to submit a CAP once we’ve converged on the details? I can get us a few percent of the way there; maybe if there are a few dozen of us with a few COMP each…