Ki Young Ju
@ki_young_ju
I think you may be misunderstanding
@GwartyGwart's main point. His argument is: 1. Without a real community, tokens function mainly as cash-out vehicles, not something people genuinely hold. 2. Incentives funded by foundations or VCs are fine, but when later public-market buyers end up subsidizing earlier participants, it starts to resemble a pyramid-like structure. You are emphasizing that token incentives themselves can be legitimate. But Gwart is pointing out that in many cases the value behind these incentives is not supported by VC or foundation revenue, but by later buyers exiting earlier ones, which is where his concern lies.
@GwartyGwart's main point. His argument is: 1. Without a real community, tokens function mainly as cash-out vehicles, not something people genuinely hold. 2. Incentives funded by foundations or VCs are fine, but when later public-market buyers end up subsidizing earlier participants, it starts to resemble a pyramid-like structure. You are emphasizing that token incentives themselves can be legitimate. But Gwart is pointing out that in many cases the value behind these incentives is not supported by VC or foundation revenue, but by later buyers exiting earlier ones, which is where his concern lies.