Best Twitter thread of the day – September 9th 

1/ Was @optimismFND’s air drop a flop?

In May, Optimism airdropped its $OP token to almost 250k users.

Our analyst @DaBooligan broke down key metrics to try and determine if the airdrop was a success. pic.twitter.com/nXxINVGxqb

— Delphi Digital (@Delphi_Digital) September 8, 2022

2/ The goal was to onboard new users into their ecosystem but was it successful?

While daily active users soared to a peak of just over 106K/day, it quickly dropped back down.

On the other hand, the floor for daily users was higher post airdrop, meaning some users stuck around. pic.twitter.com/UmrZK4MvlW

— Delphi Digital (@Delphi_Digital) September 8, 2022

3/ Airdrop activity stats

40% of eligible addresses never claimed their tokens
~55% of all addresses that claimed the airdrop transferred or sold their OP tokens on the Optimism rollup

— Delphi Digital (@Delphi_Digital) September 8, 2022

1/ Why @arbitrum $ARBI airdrop needs to happen and how @optimismFND gained dominance after $OP airdrop.

It doesnt take a genius to see how the @optimismFND airdrop affected TVL and market share. $OP airdrop happened on 2022 May 31. Comparing TVL on @l2beat show exactly how pic.twitter.com/zHfxzqldgK

— Vito Scaletta (@0xScaletta) September 7, 2022

@optimismFND pretty much doubled in TVL and reached an ATH, while @arbitrum has suffered as of now a TVL loss of ~30%. This gets visually even clearer when looking at TVL stats on @DefiLlama, since they only show TVL on protocols, while @l2beat shows all funds bridged as TVL pic.twitter.com/zLHnpQSAmF

— Vito Scaletta (@0xScaletta) September 7, 2022

Looking at data from May 31 @optimismFND market share sat only at 11% while @arbitrum dominated with a whopping 53%. Fast forward to today, Arbitrum has only lost a few % of market share, but @optimismFND gained a whopping ~20%.
Conclusion –> pic.twitter.com/0EogExABEo

— Vito Scaletta (@0xScaletta) September 7, 2022

@arbitrum needs to drop a token soon to stay competitive. I wonder how TVL and stuff would look like if there were no rumors about a token and no incentives like odyssey, were quite frankly, most people only participated to be eligible for a potential airdrop. Probably much worse

— Vito Scaletta (@0xScaletta) September 7, 2022

A demand zone is the price area at which traders's interest or potentials to buy is highest. It is a demand zone because it has many buy orders at that level. The inverse is for supply zones. But what makes a demand/supply level one of high probability?

A thread pic.twitter.com/GoseVY1RXg

— Starr (@Starr_gael) September 9, 2022

1. PREMIUM/ DISCOUNT PRICING; A high probability demand zone should be at the discount of price and supply at the premium of price. This helps us buy at cheaper prices and sell at expensive prices. Look out for demand zones in discount and look out for supply zones in premium. pic.twitter.com/aKMabmS2p7

— Starr (@Starr_gael) September 9, 2022

2. BOS;
A supply/ demand zone of high probability should break structure impulsively. It shows us that they're actually buy/sell intents around that zone. This usually leaves an imbalance that we expect price to come back to fill. Impulsive BOS is a +1 for me. pic.twitter.com/qxVu72Dp2Y

— Starr (@Starr_gael) September 9, 2022

3. INDUCEMENT; A demand or supply zone of high probability should have Inducement above/ below it respectively. I love to see weak levels before my demand or supply zone that attracts traders to place orders thereby creating enough liquidity to fuel the move I'm involved in. pic.twitter.com/uV4T4hT7XU

— Starr (@Starr_gael) September 9, 2022

The Merge is a monumental achievement

But we don’t think PoS Eth will have reached its final form post-merge

Introducing Goldfish , a provably secure variant of fork-choice that could lead to an even more secure chain

w/@fradamt @ErtemTas @dntse https://t.co/o7HcSbX8br

— Joachim Neu (@jneu_net) September 9, 2022

A relatively tricky component of Ethereum’s PoS consensus protocol is its “LMD GHOST” fork-choice rule.

This protocol has been through multiple cycles of attacks and patches:https://t.co/WC59tLDg7Mhttps://t.co/uHZhMzVY9Jhttps://t.co/NlZl45xJDthttps://t.co/KEiYSu2ouo

— Joachim Neu (@jneu_net) September 9, 2022

The PoS Ethereum protocol currently set for adoption with the Merge does not have a publicly known attack, but it also does not have a formal security analysis/proof.

— Joachim Neu (@jneu_net) September 9, 2022

Security proofs don't always correspond to real-world security. But if we can't explain conclusively why this protocol is secure, even in a toy model, that suggests we don't really understand it.

— Joachim Neu (@jneu_net) September 9, 2022

Introducing Goldfish , a provably secure drop-in replacement for PoS Ethereum’s LMD GHOST fork-choice rule.

Check out our recent preprint for all details: https://t.co/xQmphE1s30

— Joachim Neu (@jneu_net) September 9, 2022

Goldfish is based on two key techniques, vote buffering (aka view-merge) and vote expiry. The alleged forgetfulness of its animal namesake gives the Goldfish protocol its name.

— Joachim Neu (@jneu_net) September 9, 2022

Nothing is without tradeoffs: The forgetfulness makes Goldfish more vulnerable to unexpectedly high network latency.

— Joachim Neu (@jneu_net) September 9, 2022

We think of Goldfish as a first step towards more rigorous protocol design and analysis, and hope for future work to further harden Ethereum consensus security.

— Joachim Neu (@jneu_net) September 9, 2022