According to the contract the total supply of $ENS is 100,000,000 ENS. That said they have already minted 25,000,000 which are still in the contract.
I have a couple of questions about the allocation for wallet holders.
The 25% of the total supply allocated for the $ENS airdrop to users will be distributed to all addresses that are or have been the registrant of a .ETH second-level domain. The distribution is based on the total time of an address’s past registration and future registration as of October 31st, 2021.
I read this as they will divide 25% of 100,000,000 tokens across the ENS name owners based on information provided further down in the posting (which has a contradiction in it, but ignore the contradiction for this first question). Others have read it as 25% of 25,000,000 because only 25,000,000 have been minted. Just looking for some official clarification from the ENS team on is it 25% of the total supply of 100,000,000 or 25% of the circulating supply. Either way, it is not great to not call this out in code versus a blog post with issues. It should be in the code before they announce so no one can argue. Code is law.
The total time of future registrations is capped at 8 years. Importantly, the retroactive airdrop is per account, not per name . This means that each address is counted for a given day based on whether it owns at least one .ETH name on that day.
There is not question about this (for me at least) that @brantlymillegan specifically called out that only the “retroactive airdrop is per account, not per name.” He clearly references two distinct sides of this in his text. “future” and “retroactive”. So this reads that “retroactive” credits will be applied at the wallet level and future credits will be applied at the ENS level. I am not arguing that one is better than the other, but that is how it is written. I can’t get an clear answer in the discord. Non-official ENS people are saying it is by wallet only, not ENS for future. Now I get that the equation listed has it by wallet for both sides, but you can’t say (as the reader) that one is the correct expression over the other. Again, this should have already been in a smart contract for us all to see and so that it cannot be changed.
The airdrop formula is roughly:
0.27 * (# days the account owned at least one ENS name)
0.067 * (# days until the expiration of the last name on the account)
The total is then multiplied by 2 if the account also has a Primary ENS Name set.
I’m confused with this also. If the 137K wallets split 25% of something (see issue #1), how does this formula mean anything? This has to be calculated as a percentage of 100% of the $ENS tokens allocated to the wallets, not a direct number. If it is not done as a percentage, you will either over allocate or under allocate.
For example (over allocation)…
Let’s say that each of the 137K wallets has a single ENS name that was registered for 600 days prior to the snapshot and has paid the fees for another 2920 days.
Each wallet would get…
0.27 * 600 + 0.067 * 2920 162 + 195 357 ENS
Take 357 ENS * 137,000 wallets you get...
48,909,000 ENS tokens allocated to wallets. That is more than 25% of the total supply…
Total Supply = 100,000,000
Wallet Allocation = 25% of Total Supply = 25,000,000
48,909,000 > 25,000,000
To fix this, at least I think this is how you fix this is by doing a percentage of 25% of total supply. Using the same scenario as the over allocation example above…
Wallet whoismoses.eth would get…
( 100,000,000 * 0.25 ) * ( ( ( 0.27 * 600 days) + ( 0.067 * 2920 days ) ) / (137000 wallets * ( ( 0.27 * 600 days) + ( 0.067 * 2920 days ) ) ) ) = 182.4817518 ENS
I could be wrong about all of these. Just looking for the answers, don’t want to argue about which is correct or not. This doesn’t account for the 2x multiplier, but it can easily be done.