teddit

strong opinion, somewhat strongly held:

creatives don't want to create for "content traders"

the word "trader" is inherently transactional — someone primarily seeking profit, optimizing for price movement without emotional or philosophical attachment to the asset itself

idk a single creative who seeks that out

helping build farcaster | surfing @ venice, ca | eating @ gjusta / gjelina | “lucky me, lucky mud”

yet all the tools continually being made for “us” (in web3) are all about what we never asked for. 

sigh.

i get it though. a very very small amount of people want what artists create for what it is, and not what social status it brings them. it’s been humbling to realize how low that number is.

photographer • gen art noob /priyanka • art subscription hypersub.xyz/s/patronsofblue

i agree with you about the language part and i'll add that it also decides how creatives are perceived as for experimenting with a given monetization model.

im all for fafo and have participated in most new trends and used new tools (just a very curious person in this regard) if they aligned with how i wanted to add to my onchain footprint.

to be clear, i think experimenting with new monetization models so creatives can get paid better is good 

AND i think centering the language around "traders" isn't good as it implies power to traders, not creatives, is what is most important... which is philosophically misaligned with what most creatives want