Nearchos

This is called misdirection. Classic bi-partisan tactics to keep us arguing about questions that don't have answers (likely unintentional here).

The issue isn't whether memecoins are good or bad. That's a moral question that is completely subjective and highly variable based on context. Without a clear context, it's easy to argue either side with no possibility of resolution.

The important question is whether the mechanisms with which memecoins are being presented to people is accurately representing what they are and if the focus on this kind of trading activity is actually promoting positive growth that is setting us up for long term sustainability vs creating another way to extract value from an uninformed retail market.

TogetherCrew.com | single parent x 4 | seeker of adventure | survivor of chaos | host /togethercrew /kbc /single-parenting
seemore.tv/free/fc/kbc

Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Las Palmas, Spain

This comment exists within the larger context of my personal focus on helping elevate the community experience on Warpcast, primarily through deepening discussions and increasing knowledge sharing. 

So the imposition of values isn't on memecoins, but on the focus of Warpcast development and the introduction of features that prioritize memecoins over conversation and knowledge. 

I have no problems with memecoins being what they are. I have a problem with the narrative that memecoins are funding developers to build things that are a net positive for the Warpcast ecosystem and long term sustainable growth.

>>> trading activity is actually promoting positive growth that is setting us up for long term sustainability 

why do memecoins *have to* set us up for positive growth? Isn't this imposing your desire of what memecoins could be on the creators of meme coins?

I agree that mechanisms should be presented transparent. 

I might also struggle to separate my morale view of memecoins from the incentives they could create.

Eloquently expressed and on-point, as usual. 💜