Hate to yuck a lot of the yum going on right now, but I don’t like content coins because they encourage rugging the creator.

Example: someone buys a post of a creator for $5. Later it sells for $100. They make a 20x. The creator gets hardly anything.

That dynamic treats creators like inventory, not people worth supporting.

Promote holding. Reward buyers with rev share. Align incentives around supporting creators, not flipping their work.

Would love to better understand or be proven otherwise.

Today, we ran the first ever round of @betrmint featuring a @zora coin. 

well, two zora coins actually. 

everyone who spun the neon flywheel this afternoon collected some of @garrett’s $basedevo creator coin and its first-ever content coin, $evolution. Each spin also automatically sent Garrett some ETH as a creator reward, and gave players a chance to win $BASED (@basedevo’s native token) as a bonus.

During the round, the market cap of the creator coin immediately went from $12k to $37k and the content coin went from $4k to $22k.

All the while, Garrett earned about $350 in BETRMINT creator rewards (and that’s on top of what he’ll earn from volume on the zora coins as well.)

The beautiful thing about the way @jacob and co have stripped all the many layers back to arrive at the liquid simplicity of coins, is that builders can selectively scaffold layers back in to run interesting experiments like this one. 

More to come!

What do you think about this Zora coin experiment we ran with @betrmint

Mint, Spin & Win! | Join Our Live Games on Monday Wednesday & Friday @ 3PM EST | Powered by $BETR. CA: 0x051024B653E8ec69E72693F776c41C2A9401FB07

@quicknode GTM | building /startupradar 📡                                 rants and travel photos are my own