ted (not lasso)
@ted
Variant's first newsletter just dropped with a strong take from @li that web3 social networks with asset-first approaches (building for users' desire for profit) will succeed over ideology-first approaches (building for users' values + ideals): variantnewsletter.com/p/issue-1-thinking-about-web3-social. wdyt?
13 replies
0 recast
12 reactions
Varun Srinivasan
@v
people use social networks for one or more of these three reasons - status, belonging or entertainment i don't think assets or ideology are a useful frame to think about why people want to be social
3 replies
1 recast
10 reactions
Peter Ferguson
@peterferguson.eth
Disagree, plenty of social situations predominantly revolve around assets … investment clubs & sou-sous go back at least 100 years if not more. These just haven’t successfully been taking online. Status and belonging are deeply linked with asset ownership. With co-ownership becoming more available…
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
Peter Ferguson
@peterferguson.eth
seems like a reasonable time to think about asset-based social But agreed that maybe asset-based vs ideological is not the right frame for comparison
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
ted (not lasso)
@ted
sure, plenty of social situations revolve around assets but not all. example: women, for most of history, have not had access to nor control of financial assets — yet have been able to establish and grow social networks perhaps to a stronger degree than men. for them, i'd argue community ownership > asset ownership.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
