2026-01-18 00:24:48

Do you remember that early model? Every tweet could earn rewards. Sounds good, but what did it evolve into? Now every tweet is forced to become a long article. People start piling on content, padding words just to get that . And the result? The quality has actually gotten worse. Concise and sharp opinions have disappeared, replaced by long-winded and boring repetitive talk. The original intention of the rewards was good, but the way it was implemented turned things upside down.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

13 Likes

Reward
13
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

Web3Educator

· 7h ago

ah, fundamentally speaking—this is the exact perverse incentive problem i've been drilling into my students for months now. reward systems that don't account for quality degradation? classic tragedy of the commons. the protocol design was naive from day one, tbh.

Reply0

LayerZeroJunkie

· 7h ago

This is a classic case of incentive adverse selection, it's really getting worse and worse.

View OriginalReply0

HodlKumamon

· 7h ago

The data speaks for itself. We have seen at least 47 instances in history where this kind of incentive mechanism leads to the phenomenon of bad money driving out good. Each time, it's the same script... declining quality, engagement rates actually dropping, and the Sharpe ratio plummeting.

View OriginalReply0

fork_in_the_road

· 7h ago

This is a typical "incentive trap." As soon as there's money involved, human nature reveals itself.

View OriginalReply0

AirdropHunter007