Why are we using Kaito From a builder’s perspective, Kaito’s value is in fairly tracking off-chain contributions and keeping users engaged through a gamified leaderboard. Its latest update moves into onchain territory, for example, by giving boosters to Moonbird NFT holders. But rewarding based on NFT ownership is something any team can do, so it adds little beyond optics. More importantly, this shift does not address Kaito’s real challenges and raises questions about what happens when rewards are increasingly tied to onchain metrics. The Real Problem Kaito Faces Kaito inherently incentivizes shallow participation. Once users realize they can be rewarded for writing about a specific project, the result is a flood of content with little depth which leads to: 1. The audience dismisses any chatter as transparently incentivized content and tune out from it 2. Participants themselves are focused only on rewards, not loyalty 3. If the project moves in a direction they dislike, resentment builds up because they feel they have provided free labor for little return 4. Projects losing genuine support and authentic engagement it wanted when they create a leaderboard This dynamic undermines the idea of fair rewards. It creates activity, but not conviction, and it often backfires. BUT to be fair paid content itself is not new and was annoying forever. Kaito didn't make the problem of paid content, but they are promising to make it more fair and transparent. Then why does it often feel more exhausting than traditional paid promotion? The answer lies in WHO produced paid content before, and WHY we accepted it. 1. We believed that the creators we admired chose their partners selectively, and that this initial layer of due diligence gave the ad some credibility and even a sense of alpha & trust. 2. Many creators have a distinct style style, which tends to be entertaining and enjoyable, so the format mattered more than whether a post was sponsored. 3. The creator’s regular, non-sponsored content was valuable enough that audiences tolerated occasional ads without unfollowing. Paid content worked when it was embedded in a context of trust, style, and a little bit of authenticity. Kaito Also Added a New Formula of Growth What Kaito has really done is change the formula of account growth. Traditionally, people shared their knowledge or passions and gradually built a following of like-minded peers around them. This was a top-down model. If their supporters disappeared, their influence ended as well. Today communities operate differently. People follow others who discuss the same topics and engage in networks where peers are both collaborators and competitors. These communities are tied together by incentives such as likes, engagement, and rewards. The content itself matters less than the economic benefits they can reap. As a result, these communities can last indefinitely while incentives exist, but they can also break instantly when incentives disappear. So, is this new again? We have seen this before. The Monad private community began around a project but eventually evolved into something more. Members became rivals, collaborators, and ultimately friends. Even without Monad, the network of relationships persisted (it seems like that from my pov). Kaito’s “y@pper” community seems to be following a similar path. The projects and topics may change, but the bonds of competition, cooperation, and shared history remain. This leads to a strategic question. Should projects really be paying to build these peer-to-peer fellowship networks? - Is it worth only for teams desperate to list a token to pump and dump at any cost? - Is it for teams that do not understand what these metrics truly represent, but want vanity engagement? - Is it a shortcut for under-resourced teams that outsource marketing to Kaito and hope for the best? - Or is it simply for teams with too much money that feel compelled to do something? Kaito positioned itself as a solution to the problem of measuring attention and fair attribution. Unless it addresses the cultural effects of incentivized content, it risks becoming another machine that turns money into noise.