fix: github allocation

[banteg]

this addresses the issue of people renaming accounts since the github snapshot was taken. it also removes deleted accounts from the allocation. it also addresses the squatting by excluding accounts with a recent creation date.

methodology

1. fetch account creation date from github api, note accounts created after 2023-11-15 or nonexistent account. there are 1854 such accounts.
2. query past user ids from github events archive using bigquery. this finds ids for 1267 accounts. i queried events from 2018-2023, so if your account was renamed earlier, it may be missing.
3. fetch up-to-date account usernames from github api using found ids. this results in 943 renamed accounts. other accounts we found ids for have been deleted.
4. since we have ids now, we can also remove duplicate allocations that have caught multiple names of the same account.

overall this reduces allocation by 701,544 and accounts by 1175.

[ifreqs]

What does it represent? Please explain a little more clearly :)

[vthomas13]

nice

[czbag]

Good job bro

[Birzha76]

is a fair solution to the problem!

[TRIBUNALS2]

Nice one bro

[zomand]

Any suggestion where the free tokens will be allocated?

[dalechyn]

it's funny seeing community fixing the starknet airdrop issues. they could literally fetch the github ids instead of username and not causing any of those issues, since a user would be required to SSO with github to claim the reward.

so amateur.

something tells me this ain't gonna be merged anytime soon.

[dalechyn]

alright actually they have at least blacklisted the squattered usernames. https://github.com/starknet-io/provisions-data/blob/main/github_squatted_usernames.csv

I guess those whose usernames were changed post-snapshot are gonna be able to claim in some while.

[ai-slave]

Nice work, my rename wasn't catched tho and there's a squatter :(

[AdamREQ]

Any update on this, I have also checked my username has been removed - I renamed my account but I'm not sure why it's now been removed from the list.

[JaxQian]

Very appreciate that!

I changed my user name, too. The former user name showed in /github/github-1.json, but has been squatted by a new register account.

I believe that there are lots of people who have the same situation and are hoping Starknet official to resolve that problem.

[AdamREQ]

Nice work, my rename wasn't catched tho and there's a squatter :(

+1 - any update Starknet guys? Would be awesome to potentially re-run the airdrop criteria and update the merkle root with just the ID's instead of usernames.

[Omsify]

Any update on this, I have also checked my username has been removed (AdamDowson) - I renamed my account but I'm not sure why it's now been removed from the list.

+1, My old github account username was removed in the first commit of this PR. Former username was in the github-1.json file, but removed in this PR. Probably because it has been squatted by a newly registerred account, which was deleted later. Can show all the proofs to the Stark team if needed.

[steve0xp]

Thanks for this banteg! My old github username (umphams) was literally squatted by someone else the day after the airdrop eligibility was announced. Has Starknet said they were going to do anything else? I saw your tweet saying that "they'd take care of the real devs." I guess the person who squatted my old username (the day after the airdrop eligibility was announced lol) was blacklisted right? I see my old username in the "squat" list.

[AdamREQ]

We have setup a Telegram for all users who have been squatted: https://t.me/+LiFfOhYqBb00NWVi

[ai-slave]

Potentially scam link above, beware

[Omsify]

Potentially scam link above, beware

Not a scam link. I'm in there. 5 people are members. We made it to collaborate on the issue. You can join too.

[dalechyn]

Potentially scam link above, beware

i'll put the info I addressed in that tg group over here.
https://t.me/+LiFfOhYqBb00NWVi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

• Preface
• Why are we important
• Why am I addressing all of this
• How we addressed the issue
• How Starknet team addressed the issue
• What do I expect from Starknet
• How can we help Starknet
• How to contribute to this issue

Preface

Starknet has launched an airdrop on 20th Feb 2023, providing a GitHub based eligibility for those who had contributed to Top 5000 GitHub Repos or Starknet-related repositories.
However, some of users, like me and you, have changed their GitHub usernames after the snapshot was taken. In fact, there's a LOT of users who changed their usernames. I believe it is safe to say that there are at least 1796 affected users, by looking at the github_squattered_usernames.csv starknet team has uploaded.

Needless to say that this whole issue comes down to the fact that the snapshot was taken by usernames and not github IDs. We all understand that.

Why are we important

One could think – "Uh, it sucks, most of the devs claimed their airdrops and I am one of the few affected", but it is tottally wrong.
If you visit the Starknet Provisions Dashboard, and select the "GitHub" claims, you will see 406 pages of 25 items per page (dated by now), which comes down to 406*25=10150 total independent claims. As well as you can see that currently 32% of the GitHub allocation is claimed.

A rookie-level estimation could tell us that there are 10150/0.32 = ~31719 total users eligible for GitHub allocation, and 1796/31719 comes down to 5.64% of total GitHub users being affected by the bugged snapshot, with an estimate of 55.2M*5.64% = 3.11M $STRK tokens being left for "potential future community allocation".

That is by the way, the only official anouncement we have received regarding this issue. I believe such an anouncement to be not accurate, it doesn't state wether the "~1M" tokens saved from the squatted usernames that might have led to double-claim issue, neither that the issue is fixed and developers would be able to receive the airdrop.

Why am I addressing all of this

From what it seems, Starknet Team doesn't want to take responsibility for what has happened. Of course – nobody lost any funds, it's all about free wavey, but people are certainly feeling left out, ignored, uncertainty wether this gets fixed or not.
I see that questions regarding this still make their way on Discord, once again being ignored or mistreated, which is frustrating.
And surely it's also free wavey. This whole campaign is targeted to bring more developers to Starknet, which is a fair tradeof.

How we addressed the issue

@BantG has spend his time opening a PR in provisions repository claiming to have fixed the github allocation list, at least for 1175 users. Unfortunately, it was never reviewed nor commented by Starknet team.
He has a tweet regarding this, and in one of the replies, stated that Starknet team won't leave us out and that we may hear a follow-up in the next few days (he most probably has contacted one of the team members which gave some hope but shouldn't be treated as an official anouncement).
That didn't happen.

How Starknet team addressed the issue

• At 19 Feb, "der" from support team has noted that the github fixes will be applied at the airdrop date. However it seemed that the support team had no clue of this issue and were mostly replying in a "script-reply" manner. Totally understandable considering the load of questions.
• At 21 Feb, "ofiruni" from the starknet team itself has elaborated on the exact issue we are having. He asked omsify to provide his github details in DMs. The afterall is unknown as I haven't contacted him yet [will be edited]. I tried doing the same, but received no reply.
• A starknet team member "Eric Blaine" has shown to put the maximum effort in dealing with allocation issues ([1], [2]). However, when I mentioned the problem we're having, I was also ignored.
• Overall, the support was handling this issue poorly, ignoring it by simply not answering or replying with scripts rather than investing their time in this issue nor redirecting it to the team (though there were statements of such it led to no consequences).
• No official anouncement has been made from the Starknet or StarknetFnd accounts, leaving us in the unknown.

What do I expect from Starknet

I expect an official statement regarding this issue to clearly tell people wether this gets fixed or not.

How can we help Starknet

There are at least 1796 potential contributors who might invest their time helping fixing this issue, however the provisions website itself is clouse-sourced (at least I haven't found a repo).

How to contribute to this issue

I in no case want to produce any harm to the Starknet Ecosystem as a whole, so don't expect me to initiate any "raids/spams" on twitter nor discord.
Being in this group is already a big of a contribution you could make, as we can help Starknet team simplify the fix by gathering all affected users in one place.

[Omsify]

i'll put the info I addressed in that tg group over here. https://t.me/+LiFfOhYqBb00NWVi

Commenting on this PR again, as we are still looking to collaborate with all devs that got squatted and find the solution together in the telegram chat above.

[omarespejel]

It seems to me that these usernames, evilebottnawi (id 23334705) and alexander-akait (id 4567934), should have the same id to reflect that they are the same user but with a changed username, but they do not have the same id. Both were created before 2018, suggesting evilebottnawi isn't a squatter, though I could be mistaken.

I might be overlooking something, but it appears they didn't meet the first requirement of your method. @banteg, could you kindly clarify?

[banteg]

$ ag -B1 4567934
bq_gharchive/bq_2018.json
1412-  "login": "evilebottnawi",
1413:  "id": "4567934"

then go here https://api.github.com/user/4567934 to see the current name. the other account was created in 2016, so it's probably not a squatter, just an alt.

[omarespejel]

Hey @banteg, Omar from the Starknet Foundation here. While reviewing your updates, I have a couple of questions:

• How did you identify the IDs for 1267 accounts? It seems you used their emails (?). So, if a user's email didn't include their ID or was null, you wouldn't find their ID, right? Yet, you've suggested changes for users without ID-inclusive emails, like mkaynov's GitHub profile. Could you explain how you did this?
• Regarding the above, what limitations do you see in your method? For instance, you discovered 1854 accounts that changed usernames after November 15, 2023, but only obtained IDs for 1267. What about the others?

[omarespejel]

Hey @banteg, just a gentle reminder to check my previous messages when you have a moment. Thanks!

[banteg]

@omarespejel it's explained in the first message, i have used https://www.gharchive.org/ dataset on bigquery. it indexes all public events on github. i ran this query for years 2018-2023, so i looked up by username, and haven't used emails. the limitation is it could've missed people who renamed their account earlier or had no public activity in this period. i also queried github api to look up ids, up-to-date names by id and deleted accounts.

[wavey0x]

thanks @banteg for your efforts on this. happy to help where i can to make sure this issue gets resolved.