Geyser’s new Bitcoin Launchpad has arrived, and with it comes a new, innovative way to fund projects building in the Bitcoin space. The idea? Social gating. Projects must gather at least 21 followers before being able to access the full crowdfunding amount. On the surface, it looks like a great creative filter. It cuts the clutter out beautifully and puts the good projects right in the spotlight. Let's dig a little deeper. Is this really democratizing access, or only further enabling the already-connected to get ahead?

21 Followers: A Gated Community?

Think about it. And twenty-one followers doesn’t seem like that impressive of a number. In the insular, fractured, and sometimes hostile space of Bitcoin, it represents a major hurdle. Are we making a digital velvet rope that keeps out all the newcomers and the ones who don’t already have the social capital needed to engage. It’s as if you were trying to enter a club and the bouncer would only let in people who lived on his street.

What about the people with great concepts. They may feel uncomfortable with self-promotion or just not have the time to cultivate an online following. Are we really saying their ideas don’t deserve any funding just because they lack the right Twitter swagger? This kind of scenario seems reminiscent of the old boys’ network in legacy finance. In such a world, access to capital was based more on who you knew than what you knew.

The “bypass” option of paying a $21 BTC fee. However, this adds another layer of complexity. While seemingly small, this fee could disproportionately affect developers in regions with lower incomes, raising questions of equity and accessibility.

Groupthink: Innovation's Silent Killer?

Social validation can be a wonderful thing, but it can be a petri dish for terrible groupthink. If projects need to appeal to a specific social circle to get funded, are we stifling innovation and leading to homogeneity? Are we inadvertently building an echo chamber where only the ideas that support the prevailing narrative get the spotlight?

Now picture this—musicians each playing in very different styles. But if they all have to play the same popular song to get noticed, the richness and variety of their individual styles will be lost. The Bitcoin ecosystem is built upon a foundation of innovation and creative minds. We should avoid making the future PB process one that encourages sameness, and punishes fresh thinking.

Social Media: Decentralization's Achilles Heel?

Bitcoin, a technology built on the principles of decentralization, is now relying on centralized social media platforms for validation. The irony is almost painful. We’re basically leaving the vetting up to platforms that have been well documented as being algorithmic, censorship-oriented, and prone to manipulation factors.

  • Centralized Platform Dependence: Bitcoin project validation hinges on X(Twitter), a centralized platform.
  • Algorithm Influence: X's algorithms can unfairly promote or hide projects, based on a black box.
  • Data Privacy: User data is collected, analyzed, and potentially monetized by X, compromising privacy.

Might projects be able to purchase followers or run bots to create a fake social media presence? Absolutely. Everyone knows this is the case on these platforms. Follower count as a metric is just too easy to manipulate and gives users too great an incentive to game the system. This harkens back to the early days of adversarial SEO. In the early days of search, marketers would stuff websites full of keywords to increase their appearance in search results. The unintended consequence of their good-intentioned actions was a flood of garbage, regurgitated content that made the internet a worse place to be.

What we really need is a system that prioritizes meaningful and demonstrable community engagement and support. We’ve got to stop looking at these metrics and fetishizing numbers on social media account.

It's not all doom and gloom. With a few tweaks and proper marketing, Geyser could become a tremendous asset for the Bitcoin community and beyond. We have to confront these real downsides before them head-on.

Geyser’s Launchpad will be determined by our collective ability to critically assess whether it is making a positive impact. We need to consciously make sure that it helps create a more equitable and inclusive ecosystem. Let's not build another echo chamber. Together, let’s create the launchpad that launches us all. What do you think?

Here are a few suggestions:

  • Diversify Validation: Explore alternative validation mechanisms beyond follower count. Consider incorporating metrics like code contributions, community involvement, or peer reviews.
  • Mentorship Programs: Create mentorship programs to help newcomers build their social presence and navigate the Bitcoin ecosystem.
  • Prioritize Diversity: Actively seek out and prioritize projects that promote diversity and inclusivity.
  • Transparency: Publish detailed success metrics for the Launchpad’s initial cohort, including data on the demographics of funded projects and the backgrounds of their creators.

Ultimately, the success of Geyser's Launchpad will depend on our willingness to critically examine its impact and ensure that it truly promotes a more equitable and inclusive ecosystem. Let's not build another echo chamber. Let's build a launchpad that propels everyone forward. What do you think?