2026-01-14 13:36:43

How to Build an Internet Ecosystem that Rewards Quality Content?

When thinking about Web3 platform reform, the most critical question is: what is the "central support point" that can change the entire ecosystem?

Using a bowling ball as a metaphor, to knock down all the pins, you must first aim at the one in the middle. Similarly, to make the internet better, the core should be establishing a mechanism—one that allows those who genuinely invest effort in creating and producing valuable content to be rewarded.

Whether it’s text, videos, or code, as long as it is thoughtfully created, it should have corresponding value assessments and incentives. Only in this way can more people be encouraged to contribute high-quality content rather than being sacrificed by platform algorithms.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

14 Likes

Reward
14
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MetaverseVagabond

· 13h ago

That's right, but the question is who defines "quality"? The platform or the community? The ones who make money are always the top creators, while the grassroots are still being cut. This logic has been tried before; the key is how the incentive mechanism is designed. The bowling ball analogy is good, but where in the internet is there such a simple central point? Is coding considered creation? Then how do we count the viral technical articles...

View OriginalReply0

ImpermanentSage

· 22h ago

That's right, but the current question is who will define what is "quality," and could it turn into another power game?

View OriginalReply0

ReverseTradingGuru

· 22h ago

At the end of the day, it's a matter of profit distribution. Creators being able to make money is true reform. Everyone wants to produce "high-quality content," but who defines it? Is it the algorithm again? This Web3 logic sounds appealing, but I'm worried it might just become a new excuse for cutting leeks. Instead of rewarding high-quality content, it's more about preventing creators from being exploited by middlemen. The problem is that designing an incentive mechanism is extremely difficult; it easily falls into the Matthew effect. This theory sounds good, but how many high-quality creators can actually survive in reality? The bowling analogy is good, but hitting that pin is easy; the real challenge is whether it can be stable and sustainable.

View OriginalReply0

RamenDeFiSurvivor

· 22h ago

Well said, but the question is who decides what "quality" means— the platform or the community? Isn't this just an old trick?

View OriginalReply0

BuyHighSellLow

· 22h ago

Well said, it's all about hitting that point. Nowadays, platforms are all algorithm black boxes, creators are bleeding tears. A truly reliable project depends on how the token incentive mechanism is designed; otherwise, it's just the same old exploitation. If Web3 can't get this right, it's no different from Web2. People who seriously create content are too unfortunate, being hijacked by traffic for too long. The bowling ball analogy is excellent, but the key is having a sufficient funding pool to execute it.

View OriginalReply0

MEVictim

· 23h ago

That's right, but the question is who defines "quality"? The algorithm or the community? Currently, platforms operate as black boxes, and I really doubt whether Web3 can change all this. Just want to see if there are projects that can turn creators into equity holders. Bro, that's a good analogy, but in the end, the platform still makes the money. The incentive mechanism sounds great, but what if the tokenomics collapse?

View OriginalReply0

GasBandit

· 23h ago

There's nothing wrong with that, but the current issue is who defines "quality," and which algorithm is making the decision. Real creators have long been exploited by platforms. Can Web3 turn the tide? Big question mark. The bowling analogy is pretty clever, but it still seems like the big V accounts are the ones hitting the pins, while small creators are still out. This incentive mechanism sounds great, but I'm worried it might just become another capital game.

View OriginalReply0