Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
CRYPTOforCHANGE ↑
@cryptoforchange
IMO the path higher is going down is too passive. Too much of just sitting back and saying “hey you can come build on top of h”. Higher needs to turn the switch and become aggressive in seeking talent and PAYING for it. I don’t know exactly what the best flow for this is… could be focusing on some listings.. could be focusing on finding accounts on X who have influence. Could be trying to onboard some well known builders to higher… prolly all these need to happen and fast.
6 replies
1 recast
22 reactions
jaibo.base.eth
@jaibo
I was just thinking similarly, the concept of a "headless brand" souunds good on paper but doesn't translate into an actual functioning brand. If everyone is invited to "just do it" then no one will put their whole weight into growing the brand. Its not scalable right now, we have the web3 tools for it like streaming value in the network through @superfluid and incentivize "doing" but no decision will emerge until someone grabs the point and starts delegating.
2 replies
0 recast
4 reactions
CRYPTOforCHANGE ↑
@cryptoforchange
There is a reason every single company in the world that is successful has a CEO and 6 other executive positions. Not saying we need official titles but someone or even a group need to be tasked and paid to help get higher back in the race. But maybe I am midcurving this thing too much because the growth is slow
3 replies
0 recast
5 reactions
alex
@proxystudio.eth
Think this is all super worth talking about Been thinking about this a lot related to clanker too - we want to lead from the front, but also give plenty of space for teams or memes to be successful independently. At this early stage I’m more biased to getting out and talking about it, but there is the risk that people come to expect that. Same with higher, if the headless brand fails to loop in many more contributors, people will come to expect that only x or y person will do the work. Think it’s one of the harder problems to solve, but that’s also where the upside is
1 reply
0 recast
8 reactions
↑ antaur ツ
@antaur.eth
that's the standard model, sure. I have worked deeply with alternatives e.g. holacracy and sociocracy (closed and open source variations) of self organisation. I also think that OKR could work very well for higher, but not in a corporate context bc none of us are employees. More like: here is my aim for Q1, and then a loosely structured peer-to-peer process of accountability, mutual support and challenge. @lght.eth @martin Happy to explain such approach and other points I made in other replies on a farhouse session soon.
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
SQX
@sqx
both. its born of nouns so has some of the same issues nouns has. except nouns HAS the pay outs for / pre performance. feels very slow burn. hard to turn on the tap and have it maintain. IF paying in higher. then that creates downward pressure on the token . making it harder of a hold. need to create demand. I have been liking the aerodrome pools. my favorite part of higher tbh. focusing on stuff like that and higher teaching defi at 9000% concentrated lp is something.... headless that the most value accrues to the few is a hard sell. so shouldnt be the talking point IMO.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
