.I guess I see Bonding curves differently. I see them as a rough price/value discovery mechanism in general. The increasing price is a reflection of trying to find an optimal market value. I think the initial bonding curve was very steep, however, it also reflects the current appetite. There does need to be a balance against volume and scale, I believe. Also, as a tool, it is also on creators to demonstrate and prove that value. The issue to me is that many creators and fans are immature in their use of the platform. Thus they don't provide any value or they are guided by FOMO and don't evaluate their use in a rationale way.
However, it is also nice in serving as a contained market. I believe the ERC20 abstraction provided/provides a scaling means to smooth that discovery and increase accessibility. I don't think that makes it a ponzi.
Personally, I didn't not initially bring any funds into the ecosystem, but as a participant I was able to generate fees through my personal brand and engagement. I reinvested that into the ecosystem. I also provided tips and made content that I believed would be engaging or helpful to others, I don't believe this type of utilization fits into the ponzi schematic because as a later player I was able to benefit. I also was not and am not reliant on future players to benefit. My fans still have access to me and the benefits I have been willing to offer as a creator which is much higher value than my ticket costs.
I found the honest skepticism intriguing and I def agree there has been business and technical decision that are unclear and unsatisfying. For me, even the clarity about Private Key Management is a continued open question that concerns me. However, I do believe the accessibility of Stars Arenas was fundamentally interesting and ease of onboarding vital to the space.
I think Arenabook was a fantastic demonstration of how decentralized composable socialFI systems are possible and I commend that work. Also the referral aspect/slipup was a fantastic opportunity for them. I think it almost presented itself as a feature not a bug in some ways as providing a potential incentive mechanism for building tools exactly like theirs.
I agree there have been a series of fumbles, but that does not mean the game is over. There are a number of features/mechanisms that can prove Stars Arena or some similar products as the core of future social media.
.I guess I see Bonding curves differently. I see them as a rough price/value discovery mechanism in general. The increasing price is a reflection of trying to find an optimal market value. I think the initial bonding curve was very steep, however, it also reflects the current appetite. There does need to be a balance against volume and scale, I believe. Also, as a tool, it is also on creators to demonstrate and prove that value. The issue to me is that many creators and fans are immature in their use of the platform. Thus they don't provide any value or they are guided by FOMO and don't evaluate their use in a rationale way.
However, it is also nice in serving as a contained market. I believe the ERC20 abstraction provided/provides a scaling means to smooth that discovery and increase accessibility. I don't think that makes it a ponzi.
Personally, I didn't not initially bring any funds into the ecosystem, but as a participant I was able to generate fees through my personal brand and engagement. I reinvested that into the ecosystem. I also provided tips and made content that I believed would be engaging or helpful to others, I don't believe this type of utilization fits into the ponzi schematic because as a later player I was able to benefit. I also was not and am not reliant on future players to benefit. My fans still have access to me and the benefits I have been willing to offer as a creator which is much higher value than my ticket costs.
I found the honest skepticism intriguing and I def agree there has been business and technical decision that are unclear and unsatisfying. For me, even the clarity about Private Key Management is a continued open question that concerns me. However, I do believe the accessibility of Stars Arenas was fundamentally interesting and ease of onboarding vital to the space.
I think Arenabook was a fantastic demonstration of how decentralized composable socialFI systems are possible and I commend that work. Also the referral aspect/slipup was a fantastic opportunity for them. I think it almost presented itself as a feature not a bug in some ways as providing a potential incentive mechanism for building tools exactly like theirs.
I agree there have been a series of fumbles, but that does not mean the game is over. There are a number of features/mechanisms that can prove Stars Arena or some similar products as the core of future social media.