Obyte's model of airdrop distribution was based on the correct assumption that the value of a network grows according to growth of its nodes - as stated in Metcalfe's law.
However, as we've learnt reality is more complex than that and the only hope to grasp some of it is through a multidisciplinary approach.
One factor which was missing in this equation is "skin in the game", without which apparently a node in crypto is not a real node. I've written an extensive piece of this aspect in the Ivory Tower of this forum, and I'm quoting Obyte there too:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5174190

Please those interested give it a read and let's realize that a node is not a real node if it doesn't truly share the "dangers" of the network. Obyte is an amazing tech, and in time most of those who are holding bytes - nodes - without any skin in the game will likely hand them over to players willing to put their skin in the game and this will finally cause the rise in monetary value we all are patiently waiting for. But to speed up it's rise we'd have to think at ways to increase the levels of "skin in the game" of the new players.
The currently distribution by a way of a lottery is even more silly than a fair distribution to holders because it's adding zero skin in the game to the system. Just waisted time and energies IMHO. High level bounties rewarding real value contributions by the community would surely be a much wiser approach. Other ways to add skin in the game could and should be imagined. PoW coins have miners who have to continuosly put skin in the game to run the show and which it's what's rapidly causing value in those networks. We don't need miners in Obyte - which is good - but we'd need to find other alternative sources of skin in the game. Let's realize that a monetary system is not only an algorithmic system, but also a sociological one, and let's act accordingly.