MegaETH announces the distribution strategy for the Token sale

Original Title: “MegaETH Public Allocation Strategy”

Author: namik (CSO of MegaETH)

Compiled by: Jiahua, ChainCatcher

Handling a token sale event that is oversubscribed by 28 times and has over 53,000 participants is not as exciting as it sounds. In my previous article, I emphasized that we are primarily focusing on two groups of people this time:

Early and active members of the MegaETH community

We believe that we will grow together with MegaETH for a long time.

A few days before the sale ended, Artemis (our data lead) and I met in Istanbul to start extensive simulations. We tried many different methods to “perfectly” measure everyone's contributions and quickly realized that it was impossible in such a short time because “contribution” is multifaceted.

Therefore, we decided to divide the problem into two parts:

1. Fair distribution for existing community members

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

The rest of this article will detail how we achieved these two points and accomplished this goal:

Existing community member distribution

For the first group, which is our existing community, we used the old method: manual operation.

We have compiled a list of individuals who have been substantially involved in MegaETH since we emerged from “stealth” by relying on existing community channels, including @Heisenbruh and our mod circle.

This list includes those:

Early and continuous participants

People who help shape the atmosphere and values of the project

Those who support us during the bear market and quiet times.

Those who provided feedback, signals, and energy before the tokens attracted speculation.

It should be noted that most of these individuals did not choose to lock their tokens. We believe this is fine. They have contributed with their time, attention, and belief. In our view, they have “put in the effort.”

In the spirit of transparency, this is the token sale list that we believe represents our core community over the past few years.

This list is not perfect. We certainly missed some people, and for that, I sincerely apologize.

This group, along with the application developers who have chosen a one-year lock-up, are the only individuals personally selected by the team.

Even in this group, not everyone received a full allocation. Far from it. The scale of the sale and demand still forced us to make trade-offs. However, we are pleased that this approach respects those who helped us get to where we are today, while also preventing the sale from becoming purely a popularity contest. These users received far more shares than what could be allocated through algorithmic sorting, and, aside from the app developers mentioned earlier, the vast majority of these participants are unlocked.

Measure long-term investors

The second group consists of all those who participate in the sale through public processes and may become long-term holders of MegaETH.

Here, we aim to systematize. We have designed a scoring system that combines:

On-chain activities

Social signals and influence

MegaETH Specific Participation Level

Do not consider it as a transaction (1 year lock-up intention)

Our goal is not to reward “points grinders” (, but to evaluate genuine belief.

Indicators Used

We use four different indicators in the overall scoring system.

1. Moni Score

Moni score is used as:

Basic screening criteria

as a component of a broader social score

Background information:

My Moni score is approximately 7,000

@artemis_onchain's Moni score is approximately 300

Based on this allocation, we believe that setting the Moni score at 50 as the minimum threshold in most cases is appropriate. It is not a perfect standard for measuring quality, but it serves as a useful boundary to distinguish between inactive accounts and those with at least a certain level of activity. Alternatives for social verification are discussed and implemented below.

2. On-chain activity score

On-chain activity scores are a weighted composite of several categories.

Early )15%(

Early interactions and adventurous behaviors

OG )15%(

Long-term participation in a broader ecosystem

Position )15%(

Financial commitments and stakeholder-related proxy indicators

NFT )7.5%(

Current on-chain participation and activities reflected through NFTs.

Recently )15%(

Your recent level of activity, not just a few years ago.

MEGA specific )32.5%(

Activities related to MegaETH, including CAP scores, MEGA NFTs, and specific testnet operations.

3. Social Score

Social score combines:

Moni

Kaito

Additional citations (indicated by []) and Ethos for manual review.

We used a combination of different tools instead of relying on a single metric. This helped us avoid obvious bot and low-quality spam accounts, and also helped identify genuine participants who are truly engaged.

4. Mega Score

The Mega score is a signal specific to MegaETH. It includes:

CAP score

Ownership of MEGA NFT

specific testnet activities

We use Mega scores in two ways:

As part of the on-chain activity score

As a filter for certain thresholds, to ensure that Mega-specific participants are not pushed out by ordinary on-chain score manipulators.

Why is locking up important?

We placed significant weight on whether anyone chooses to lock their ) for a year.

In our view, locking for a year in a turbulent market is a strong indicator of conviction. No one knows what will happen tomorrow. Committing to a one-year lock is a statement that you are in it for the long-term growth, not just for quick trades.

Participant screening and allocation process

Once we have the score, we still need to decide:

Who is included in the allocation list

How to convert scores into actual allocation scales

We divide it into two objects:

Participants in Locked Staking

Unlocked participants

Distribution process for locked-up participants

For participants who choose to lock their assets, you must meet at least one of the following criteria to be considered:

Moni score is above 50

On-chain score higher than 200

The Mega score display is not limited to just one Fluffle NFT.

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

has a basic level of social activity

Has clear on-chain signals

Has a strong MegaETH specific participation.

After applying these filtering criteria, approximately 29.4% of the locked addresses were included in the allocation set. This corresponds to about 1,000 addresses.

Once a wallet passes the screening, its allocation is a function of its final score, which integrates on-chain and social signals. We adopt a piecewise continuous curve that rewards high performers while maintaining a minimum allocation threshold.

This design has led to:

Top 5%: Linear gradient from 100% to 95% share

The next 3% $MEGA 5%-8%(: a sharp drop from 95% to 55% share.

The next 7% )8%-15%(: continuously declining from 55% to 35% share.

Remaining 85%: Decreasing from 35% index to a minimum share of 25%

Distribution process for participants who have not locked their assets

If an unlocked address meets at least one of the following thresholds, it will be accepted:

Moni Score > 200

Social Score > 200

On-chain score > 300

Mega score > 68 ) is greater than one Fluffle NFT (

Therefore, if you are clearly active on the chain, have strong social signals, or demonstrate significant MegaETH-specific engagement, you qualify. You do not need to meet all these thresholds.

In fact, among the 49,976 unlocked participants, 5,031 wallets passed this screening, with an acceptance rate of approximately 10.1%. The competition among addresses that passed the screening is fierce, even for the minimum share. We believe the algorithm will do its job and fully recognize that some individuals—even with a large amount of MegaETH activity and holdings—may not qualify if their other metrics are weak. But this is a fair game, and we respect the results.

Among the accepted groups, we rank wallets based on their overall scores and then determine the percentage of the requested allocation they received.

At the top of the rankings, the allocation follows a smooth descending slope. The wallets at the forefront receive the highest share of the allocation, and this proportion gradually decreases as your ranking falls.

After a certain ranking, the curve flattens, and everyone else will receive the same minimum allocation share.

Protection measures for high scores in small indicators

We noticed that some smaller bidders managed to achieve the same ranking as larger bidders. To maintain fairness, we ensure that no participant receives an absolute amount lower than the 5 bidders next to them (i.e., those ranked immediately beside them).

For example, @thedefinvestor, who is ranked in the top 15 among unblocked bidders, has no bid limit )max bid(. If the allocation is based on percentages, he would receive a lower allocation. Meanwhile, his neighbor bid at the limit and received a similar percentage share, but the amount received (absolute value) is much larger.

In order to recognize @thedefinvestor's outstanding performance and his ability to rank so high despite a smaller bid, his allocation has been raised to the limit, bringing it close to his neighbors' level. This is where the 100% allocation shares come from.

Participant Example

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

@cp0xdotcom does not have much influence on Twitter and has never tweeted about MegaETH. Therefore, his social score is very low. However, this did not stop him from ranking in the top 20 among all participants based on total score, securing 92% of the highest bid he locked in.

His advantage lies in:

Over 8 years of on-chain history

Burned 194 ETH of gas

Gained high scores due to early participation in contracts that later gained real traction in the Ethereum ecosystem.

The number of independent contracts interacted with historically has reached 3,490.

In the past 180 days, there were 164 days active on the Ethereum mainnet.

He has no NFTs and no Mega-specific activities. He still ranks highly, which indicates that our system allows those who excel in their own areas to reach the top, even without social or Mega-specific bonuses.

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

@nics_off is almost a mirror. The wallet he provides has less than 2 years of on-chain history, has burned only 1.5 ETH in gas, and has interacted with only 150 independent contracts. His on-chain score is average. His social score played an important role.

Factors that contribute to his ranking rise:

Have a strong influence on Twitter and remain consistently active.

Ranked 13th on the Kaito MegaETH leaderboard

High-quality MegaETH focal content

This combination allowed him to achieve the highest total score among unlocked participants. He ranked in the top 17 among all unlocked users and received the top 20% allocation share of that group.

His example also shows that having a huge number of Twitter followers is not enough. Because social scores combine Moni and Kaito with equal weight, high-quality content related to Mega is more important than the original number of followers.

We have seen many similar cases at the top of the leaderboard. We would especially like to emphasize:

@barthazian, he ranks first among all users and scores high on every metric.

@0xMaxBT, he won the title of “MegaETH Testnet Legend”, being the only one among 53,000 participants to have achieved a 100% hit rate on all tracked testnet contracts.

Anti-Witch Measures

We have implemented multi-layer witch attack protection.

First, we received reports of witch clusters from the community and external groups such as Bubble Maps and Echo. These clusters are used as direct filters for participants.

Secondly, our scoring system itself makes it difficult for witches to pass. To achieve a high score, a wallet needs strong on-chain activity and a credible history. Low-quality associated addresses typically fail at this stage.

We also found many cases where a single wallet or social account is linked to multiple KYC bids. When we detect this pattern, we ignore all related requests.

Finally, we will continue to conduct witch checks on the wallets that received allocations and reserve the right to refund users in the event of malicious activity.

I would like to thank Artemis again for all the hard work. We are honored by the demand for this sale, and we hope this maximum transparency will help everyone understand how we arrived at the final allocation results.