ppl need to pull their heads out of the sand and look at this topic objectively
a project paying creators to post is not engaging in charity and the creators accepting those jobs are not just selling tweets
it is a transfer of value
but that value cannot just be "i posted for you and my post got some views and engagement"
if that's all projects wanted, they can just pay the biggest CT accounts for the views and engagement. no need to work with smaller creators
to make it clear for those that don't know how to think deeper on this topic. the differentiation is what you bring as a creator beyond distribution
• can you explain the product better than the team can?
• does your message resonate with the right audience?
• can you help translate the protocol into something ppl understand?
• can you make ppl curious to try it?
posting is just the surface of the brief. the actual job is of a creator is turning the attention YOU can generate into trust, trust into usage and usage into revenue
after all, projects don't survive on views and impressions. they need users and their expectation of creators is to create this value for them
if you're a creator that does this regularly, projects will keep returning to you. if you're just selling views and engagement then it's more likely you'll get cut out
it's not rocket science
What if creators got paid based on actual performance metrics?
This is what I mean by real performance:
You can literally establish a baseline around engagement views, score audience quality (verified users, demographics), and then increase compensation based on performance outside the CT bubble.
X already gives you a full analytics suite on every post.
The tools are there.
The problem is most people have no idea how to look under the hood and that’s insane because it takes 2 minutes to send a snapshot of post performance.
Make this standard practice for creators.
Brands get more confidence because they know they’re paying for something real.
The solution is not going back to ref links, Layer 3s, or all the other nonsense we’ve already seen fail.
And the reason why is pretty simple.
Whenever financial incentives exist, people will abuse whatever system is in place.
The only way to fight that is dynamic boundaries based on performance metrics that can’t be counterfeited.
You even have time-based engagement and view analytics.
It becomes incredibly easy to spot inorganic activity or botting.
So again, the tools are already there.
Why aren’t they being used?
Is it because a large part of Web3 projects don’t actually care about substance and just want vanity metrics so they can go to exchanges or investors and “show progress” on the social side too?
Is that one of the reasons why almost no project seems to have a real community?
Food for thought