off the dome, one Coin per creator seems better than one Coin per content. (each content could be priced in terms of CreatorCoin). except for the fact that this is less like a memecoin and more like a s*curity, why is this a worse model?

I work at the posts office

terminally.online

I’ve done so many hours of user research here and fundamentally almost every serious creator doesn’t want to:

1. Have their body of work (and career) tied to an extremely fickle, arbitrary number

2. Lose their sense of self worth in the aggressive financialization of their every move

3. Scam their true fans (even accidentally)

For the vast majority artists and makers, launching a coin is ALWAYS serious bc it’s tied to their reputation (which is basically all they have bc they have no money) and most of their fans aren’t degenerate gamblers so they cannot and will not understand why number go up and down so much and so fast. 

Number can’t go up rationally without being tied to a stream of cash flows. That is fundamentally a security. Everything else is the fever dream playland of (who I affectionately call) the mentally ill.

weird internet kid. word rotator. yapping on /okbanger. playing with @wannanaplabs. curating in /cameron | dev + vet + HBS. 
Cameronarmstrong.org 🫡

Sequencing the past few years has capital C Creators scared, and understandably so. The SuperRare meta still exists, and most don't understand scarcity on the Internet. Nfts are more skeuomorphic and more readily understood by creators and collectors. But they are inefficient, especially at the scale we all hope to achieve.

That creators are demonizing fungible tokens is disturbing. 

Many have been here long enough to understand the tradeoffs. Programmed passive income, liquidity, UX, etc were everything they wanted and were upset about with nfts. Like SuperRare clouded judgement before, pump/memecoins have done the same for fungis. 

This argument around token type is counterproductive and preventing progress. The experiments NEED to be run. 

The real problems are distribution and discovery. We don't talk about those anymore bc it's easier to complain than solve hard problems. Both will be solved through fungibles.

stealth mode in pursuit of an aesthetic eth

Respectfully:

-How many nfts have you created? How many collectors do you have? How much revenue?

-How many nfts have you collected? From how many creators? How much capital?

I understand both parties more deeply than most.

Every pixel of this space is financialized. 99.99% of creators who publish here made a financial decision. To say otherwise is unserious.

Tools do not need to work for everyone. The avg/median creator on zora is earning much less than they were before. Is this a problem? 

For zora definitely. For creators, publish elsewhere. I'm experiencing this firsthand, yet continuing bc short-term revenue is less interesting than long-term open markets and a larger reach. The experiment is worth running.

Creatives are discounting the potential without even trying because they're scared. Fungibles are superior open source software, and that's being totally missed.

The stigma is underserved and dangerous. All this happened with nfts and it was largely unhelpful. We are hindering progress

I appreciate you taking the time to respond and respectfully think you don’t understand how most “creator + collector” relationships tend to work

Most people buy and save the thing (the caught baseball, the ticket stub, the nft) because it has fundamental value to the collector. It’s tied explicitly to something emotional like perceived local status or a personal connection.

There is of course a professional collector class that cares about reselling but the vast vast majority of fan collecting has historically been things that have essentially no resell value. 

I’ve always found thinking NFT = beautiful receipt to be much more useful as a mental model for creator biz models

The obsession with reselling is a degen affliction not a historical truth

Could coins unlock something powerful passive income wise for some creators? Sure, but i have seen nothing over the past in crypto that unlock will extend past the the top 10% of creators of things. 

And everyone else deserve a sustainable models too

Btw, all tokens are tied to reputation.

The notion that fungibles are uniquely so is ridiculous. I get that fungibles are scary bc of abusive degens, but fundamentally that's incorrect.

How long have creators sweated and argued over pricing, supply, which platform to use, etc? Fungibles actually take these pressures off the creators back and out them on the market's.

Unintentionally scamming via fungibles is pure madness as a narrative. What is a greater scam than selling someone an NFT they will almost certainly never be able to sell? 

If I give you $5 and you give me a digital asset, which is better: not being able to sell or being able to sell for $1?

Tokens will be innovated upon but these arguments are beyond tiresome and beyond the point. Creators are supposed to set the tone, innovate, experiment, and create at will. These narratives are self-destructive.