Andrew Lee, [Apr 4, 2025 at 8:18:41 PM]:
I want to blog about this, but people tend to define both "crypto" and "morality" by the standards of the cycle in which they joined, and they rarely (if ever) re-underwrite assumptions.

I was personally guilty of this too. Joining bitcoin 1st cycle, I had an extremely purist point of view. I thought all btc forks including Feathercoin, Potcoin, Dogecoin were all scams. Conditioned by those "scams", I also considered ETH a scam. (I bought the ETH ICO but I dumped it "too early" for more BTC.)

I missed all the narratives and evolution of the space when working on Handshake. We were a bit out of touch and appealed to people who vibed with Cycle 1 narratives && willing to consider non-bitcoin assets (small constrained intersection). I think this explains a lot of the root cause of friction on "future of handshake."

This became more clear to me when I took an entire cycle off living off grid in the mountain.

The current narratives / state of the trenches is a whole new world, and I generally feel like Handshake needs to adapt / evolve with the changing times.

Evolving handshake is going to be a very difficult task, one that I'm not ready to take at the moment. Nole was my best candidate.

I'm focused on figuring out ways to aggregate attention in crypto, and perhaps once I'm successful in figuring that out, I can help handshake evolve successfully, but I'm limited in what I can do now.

If someone wants to pick this up, I can help, but otherwise, burning is easiest if you guys want to resolve this issue.

I don't think burning will make any difference, but mb proving it to all the burn advocates will help community realize that that's not the issue and focus priorities.

Quote from Andrei C
Андрей, [Apr 6, 2025 at 12:13:25 AM (Apr 6, 2025 at 12:14:05 AM)]:
If the main concern of V2 or token reallocation supporters is low token price or tiny mcap, we can solve all that by decreasing circulating supply and increasing demand for names.

Prices are set at the margin so you only need ~800 people with 1m coins each to make the whole supply illiquid. 800 people with 1m each is not much. We already have whales sitting on 2, 3, 5, 10m coins.

If only 10-25% of total supply is available for trading, something that increasingly becoming a norm with high cap coins, HNS token price/mcap will go up assuming there will be growing demand for domains.

Clear tokenomics is a must imo.

When it comes to demand for censorship resistant technologies, I can easily share 10-15 articles about growing Internet censorship and decreasing accessibility that came out just recently. HNS is in a much better position now than it was in 2020 because more people are concerned about censorship now than in 2020.