Proposing Quadratic DOT Lockdrop

Our highest priority is to become one of the first Polkadot Parachains. And we are still discussing how to win the Parachain auction here.

I think many people are thinking about linear distribution like this (A).

*The number is not precise

We also have this type of distribution. (B)

Let’s compare (A) with (B).

Case (A)

  • You can get 50,000 PLMs when you lock 1,000 DOTs and 100,000 PLMs when you lock 2,000 DOTs.

Case (B)

  • You can get 40,000 PLM when you lock the same amount. On the other hand, you can get 150,000 PLMs when you lock 2,000 DOTs.

Case (B) is quadratic. And the more DOTs you lock, the higher bonus rate you can get. As a result, we can incentivize DOT holders to lock more tokens than expected.

We would like to find the best way to do the DOT Lockdrop.


If we look at statistics after 2nd lockdrop on site:

We can see that top 20 participants (0.0033 % from all participants) locked 37053 ETH, which is 27 % from overall locked amount. If we have quadratic lockdrop, how you will motivate other 99.99 % of participants who locked 73 % of total amount of ETH to participate in 3rd lockdrop if they know that they will get much less PLM for 1 DOT than those in the top 20?


This quadratique lockdrop method will not encourage investors to block their DOTs

I think the method that you have originally planned is the right method to attract participants to win the parachain auction

Case (B) is quadratic. And the more DOTs you lock, the higher bonus rate you can get. As a result, we can incentivize DOT holders to lock more tokens than expected.

I understand the world of tokens is (as usual) world for whales, but the mechanism makes whales more bigger than usual.

Only I think in that way? :wink:


Though case(B)can get more DOT locked,but distributed total top PLM token seriouly increased finally.

I understand the apparent need for DOT allocation but case(B) will make this parachain a whale’s paradise. Consider making the parabola resulting to a more sensible distribution, for example:
1000 DOT -> 40.000 PLM
2000 DOT -> 100.000 PLM to 120.000 PLM

Quick question… where is the 2000x applied to the calculation?

The 3rd round is anticipated to be the most beneficial round. That has always been clear via the documentation provided many months ago.

As I mentioned in the article, *The number is not precise

@sota this is without any doubt the best way to incentivize DOT holders to lock more tokens than expected.

But at the same time I’m agree with what @tomasz-waszczyk wrote:

So, we have to think about this with attention…the fair distribution could be compromise

1 Like

Fully agree with the concerns about heavy distribution to the top. You will probably create a situation with fewer tokenholders possessing more tokens.

1 Like

Why not some sort of sigmoid function with carefully chosen slope? This would encourage small investors to pull out just that tiny bit more, while still keeping whales where they are.


There would definitely need to be weighting to the lower dot contributors/smoothing the curve - otherwise it’s just a similar situation to angel investors etc…

1 Like

As a small investor, of course I would prefer that people with small amount of DOTs can have also good opportunities to lock and take advantages of it. I like the current method used in the Lockdrop 2.


The redenomination (1/1000) which is planned soon for participants in ETH lockdrops, will it also be effective on the 3rd DOT lockdrop?

for example:

If I lock 1000 DOT, I would receive 50,000 PLM tokens.

After renaming 1/1000 = 50 PLM

So if I lock for 2 years 1000 DOT with a current value of $ 30,000 I will receive 50,000 PLM ÷ 1000 (redenomination 1/1000) = 50 PLM ?


No this will not have any effect on future lockdrop.
Redenomination will happen before this.

Kind regards

Perfect earn to plm coin

Hi there,

As a little investor, I agree with @tomasz-waszczyk

I also have a question : on which platform the DOT lockdrop will take place ?

Cause if it’s Ethereum, I understand why you are looking at whales to place their DOTs (because of the current fees)

But if it’s on another blockchain as DOT or BSC with low fees, why not try to get little investors ?

I think a distribution !B-like will be more fair and you could use for your marketing

(don’t look at the numbers, just look a the curve, it’s a random image)

This could encourage little investors which will make growth the community which, I think, is important for the 1rst dApps hub on polkadot

The lockdrop will take place on Kusama chain for Shiden and Polkadot chain for Plasm Network.
The fees will be minimum to none. We are aiming for everyone to join and we hope little investors jump in on this because we are a community driven project.

Only the 1st and 2nd lockdrops were on Ethereum.
Hope this answers your question.

Kind regards


Alright, thank you @Maarten :slight_smile:

So I don’t get why this quadratic lockdrop should repay more for whales than for little investors :confused:

I though quadratic lockdrop was used to avoid this kind of things, as well explained in finematic’s video : How Can $1 Turn Into $27? QUADRATIC FUNDING Explained - YouTube

So what’s the deal ? do you think Plasm won’t get as much DOT as we need for the auction ? or do you think the whales will be more implicated in the project compared to little investors ?

(I’m just trying to understand :slight_smile: )

Oh and if you want to attract little investors, maybe you should give everybody who participate a unique NFT (as karura did for an event)

I’ve noticed there were some artists in this community (Remaking Plasm Logo!)

You could then see with Acala if there is a way to accord on a NFT standard (if it’s not already there)

The idea is to call in new investors (I know french community loves NFTs) as well as future NFTs-Plasm-based platforms

Kind regards

In any case, the longest blocking should be rewarded with tokens at a higher multiplier. People have more risks and missed opportunities to make money using this money elsewhere. If instead they give LDOT (liquid DOT, as in ACALA), then this risk disappears and the parabola of token distribution should be left, but strongly leveled. I think it’s no secret that the explosion of the NFT sector is coming and on this topic you can play on the PR of the Plasm project. Alternatively, in order to avoid multi-accounts, as it was on the distribution of Karura for reposts and subscriptions on social networks, after the distribution of tokens of all three locks is completed, a very simple NFT system can be distributed randomly. 3 different NFTs with different rarity. All 3 types of NFT can be obtained by everyone, but the one who locks for the maximum period will have a high chance of getting the rarest NFT. Offer more options on how you can ride Plasm on the NFT hype, people will like it and may give some incentive to participate and lock for a longer period. And if rare NFTs differ in appearance, then it will be even cooler, you can announce a competition in the community to create an image of NFT tokens, vote for which NFT tokens what rarity to assign and reward artists.