There is no demand for “getting paid to create content” on social media platforms (or blockchains for that matter).

1. Every other social media platform has thrived with no user incentive to post besides an audience. An audience is a better incentive than cash! You can sell whatever you want to an audience. This excludes YouTube which requires significantly more effort to create content on.

2. Not everyone can be a “content creator”. Content is infinitely reproducible and sharable, meaning the top 1% will get 99% of the attention. There’s no longer a local musician in every town. There’s a select few for the whole world.

The whole thing is a massive grift to inflate usage and content that no one will ever see.

> Every other social media platform has thrived with no user incentive to post besides an audience.

How many new at-scale social media platforms in the US in the last 10 years?

Only 1. TikTok. And they spent $1B+ for multiple years on Facebook ads to acquire users. 

So instead of transferring that value to Meta, why not try to transfer it directly to the users building the network?

I agree with both, I think token ads works, but not in the current model. I wish I ran web2 style ads (via web3 ad networks) earlier, I know it really doesn't scale, but it taught me way more about the user then token drops ever did. 

We spent so much time on wallet data, when ads came and who converted was a completely different user then "positive wallets"  vs what users converted to 3pt sales.

Wallet clusters, N-distance from farmers, wallets with app usage, wallet with known user interactions, how long they held, if they bought more, if they didn't receive and bought... all unrelated in the end to who converted to sales based on how we created insights. When those who were seeking token drops by creating content left, 0 impact to ad revenue, even at a Nx decrease. Even Larimer punted Post2Earn after trying twice SteemIt and Voice.