BitClout scraped Twitter to auto-create profiles for 15,000 top users and issued tokens tied to those accounts without permission, essentially running an unapproved ICO scheme. The platform's marketing obscures what it actually is, and both creators and investors should think twice before participating.
Super quickly, can you give the analogy of the ICOs? Because that's basically what it is. Because just when it's positioned, this thing has been positioned so many different ways, and that's partially because it's still kind of half-baked and things are being worked out, and, and it may evolve into other things. But at least as to like what it is today, I thought what you said about it was so spot on in terms of what this really is, at least so far.
Yeah, sure. So on paper, and again, I, I think one of the reasons that BitClout has been so successful is because they are master marketers. Like, I don't approve of it, but it's kind of like when your kid gets in trouble and you're— I don't have a kid, but like, you gotta know when kids get in trouble, you're like, them, right? Yeah, you're like, oh, you're in so much trouble, but I get it as well.
Like, nice job, buddy, you know?
Yeah, I don't— so I don't, I don't approve of what they did, but they— but it's a smart growth hack. The other thing is that they're positioning this product in a very smart way, where the reality of what it is has been abstracted away. So what this is on paper is, they've basically done 15,000 ICOs without the permission of the people who are backing those coins. By scraping Twitter and creating an account for the top 15,000 people, they've done 15,000 ICOs. And now they're basically just trying to get people to buy into those ICOs. And I think anybody who's thinking of getting into this either as a creator or an investor should ask themselves, you know, one, as a creator, would I create an ICO for myself? If the answer is no, you know, think twice about it.
Just because someone did it for you doesn't mean, you know, all of a sudden it's a good idea.
Yeah. And then similarly, like, as a, as a backer, would I buy so-and-so's ICO? It starts to kind of break down because, like, when you think about this as betting on somebody's reputation, that's one thing. You're like, "Oh, okay. Well, somebody like Kim Kardashian or Tim Ferriss or Steph Smith, these are all people that I think are doing interesting work and are probably going to become more popular on this platform. So if I'm early, I should buy in." But you have to ask yourself the real question, which is like, if I issued an ICO tomorrow, would you buy it? Probably not. But what the platform's done is aggregate thousands of ICOs and make it extremely easy to issue a new one, which could be useful. Like, there's, there's potential there, but let's not, let's not mince words about what it is. These are just ICOs. That's literally all they are.
