Community is Dead, Long Live Community

链捕手2026-05-15 tarihinde yayınlandı2026-05-15 tarihinde güncellendi

Özet

The author reflects on the transformative and often painful evolution of crypto communities. They nostalgically recall the early days of Web3, where genuine bonds formed around shared beliefs in projects like DeFi and NFTs, leading to deep friendships and passionate collaboration. However, the essay argues this authentic "community" is now largely dead. It has been corrupted by a culture of extraction, where most participants in modern Discord servers are motivated solely by financial gain—grinding for points, chasing airdrops, and immediately selling tokens. This dynamic creates a facade of engagement that vanishes after a token launch, often replaced by hostility. The author uses their project, Across Protocol, as a case study, announcing the shutdown of its Discord server because it no longer represents a true community but a toxic space dominated by mercenary actors. The piece concludes with a bittersweet farewell to the old era and a determined call to continue building with the few remaining genuine believers. The title's paradox, "Community is dead. Long live community," mourns the loss of the original ideal while expressing hope for its future revival.

Author: jamesrichardfry, Head of Marketing, Across Protocol

Compiled by: Jiahuan, ChainCatcher

I've been struggling with how to write this. Part of me wants to sugarcoat it. Dress it up in marketing speak. Frame it as something beautiful and move on.

But that wouldn't be entirely honest. If you know me, you know I wear my heart on my sleeve and I'm incapable of lying. So here it is, bluntly.

Community is dead. Of course, it wasn't always this way. That goes without saying, but I'm saying it out loud anyway.

I still miss the good old days on Clubhouse and Discord chatrooms. The times we spent hours "vibing" with people from across the internet about magic internet money, the latest NFT drop, the best staking opportunities, complaining about the money we lost, dreaming about the next great project, and actually *building*.

To this day, I'm still good friends with many of those people. Some have even become friends in real life. When community is good, it's good. I miss those days.

Zooming out a bit, what is community? I talked about this for way too long during a recent all-hands meeting, and I could almost hear the eyes rolling from my colleagues.

To share a bit of that epiphany with you, here's my take on community:

A community is a group of people gathered around a shared interest. In many aspects of our daily lives, we have community.

From the school you go to, the sport you play, the religion you practice, the gym you frequent, even the grocery store you shop at.

Some communities are shallow. The group of old men I see at the gym Monday through Friday is a community, but it's clearly very different from the friend circle community we intentionally spend time with.

Web3 or crypto community is no different.

We all gathered around our shared interests. DeFi summer. NFT mania. NFT winter. Cross-chain interoperability whatever. Zero-knowledge proofs whatever.

Whatever you're into, there's a group of people diving down the rabbit hole with you.

Some were there for the financial speculation. Others, from a deep belief and commitment to the early cypherpunk movement. Some crypto communities were surface-level or perfunctory.

Others were deeply profound. I mean, deeply, deeply profound. Like a religious congregation, fanatic following, belief-in-your-gut, put-your-money-where-your-mouth-is profound.

We wore the same "clothes" (PFP), spoke our own language (WAGMI), looked crazy to outsiders, and we didn't care one bit because we believed in what we were all gathering to pursue.

Early crypto community was inseparable from belief.

Not just belief, but a deep, gut-wrenching conviction that gave you the courage to get on stage and talk for hours in front of hundreds about why you believed in the founder, the project, the roadmap, and why you were the project's diamond-handed hodler.

Conviction. That's what drove the parabolic growth in the early days. Without community, crypto would be nothing.

Across, by the way, was no exception. The early days of the Across community were the golden days. The vibes were high. There was deep conviction (yes, I'm repeating that word). Excitement, energy, people genuinely caring about the project for the innovation, not for the token price.

We hired people from that community who are still with us today. And some of the early people who stuck around are still die-hard community members, riding the waves with us.

When community is good, it's good.

And then, everything changed.

Fast forward to today. I'm going to make some sweeping generalizations here. Please know that I'm not referring to "all" community members, "every" community group, and not painting with a broad brush. But if I continue to be blunt, I'm referring to most. Vast majority.

The word "community" has been bastardized by the crypto "extractors." In many ways, if you want to know why "the love of money is the root of all evil," look no further than the countless Discord "communities."

Thousands of unread messages a day. Impressive daily active users. Constant social support, until the Token Generation Event (TGE) hits. We all know the playbook.

The vibe before TGE mimics the early crypto community sentiment. Deep conviction. Gut-wrenching fire. Courage to get on stage. PFP and project tags in bios. Ride or die, diamond hands, bullish hodler.

Then, everyone changes.

You go to sleep one night, barely able to keep up with the Discord notifications.

You wake up the next morning, and it's a ghost town.

Or worse.

You find your loyal "community" coming at you with pitchforks and torches.

Over the airdrop.

You see, "community" is no longer community.

It's devolved into endless, AI-generated spam to farm points, for the hope of an airdrop, to immediately dump, then complain about the token price, and call the project a scam or rug (which, to be fair, is often true).

You know where I'm going with this long-winded rant, right?

"Community" is no longer community. You know it. You feel it. The timeline feels off. Discord servers feel off. Podcasts feel off. Twitter Spaces feel off.

Everything feels wrong, like "Con" will never be "Confucius." Everyone reading this today knows it deep down, even if you've never articulated it this clearly before.

Today's "community" is a cheap imitation of the early community that built crypto into what it is. The shared interest of these "community" members boils down to one thing. Extraction. Quick. Decisive. Extraction. It's the poison that kills what crypto could have been, and should have been.

Most of today's (again, not all) Discord "communities" consist of the dregs of the remnants.

Some are genuine loyalists and believers. (To those who have stuck with Across, we wouldn't be here without you. Thank you. You know where to find us, we'll always have a place for you.)

Some, often the majority, are there to extract from the project. I won't dwell on that here.

And finally, those who only appear to complain. Because in every bear market, these specific types of "community" members will kick you when you're down, as if the bear market hasn't affected every team member, and as if we caused the bear market to happen.

Unfortunately, the Across Discord has recently fallen into this "majority" category as well. Our "community" has become something else.

The people who recognize the incredible achievements we've made, the progress Across has pioneered for the entire industry, and who still support us, are tired of being part of this extractive "community" and have left the Discord.

The few who remain will happily move with us to Twitter and other channels. The rest are what I defined above as "community." Yes, I'm saying this with gut-wrenching fire and deep conviction.

Therefore, today, the Across Discord is moving to read-only mode.

This is the first step in our planned, full shutdown of the server.

To the community of believers still standing with us, let's keep building. We have a lot of work to do.

To Discord, thank you for hosting some of the good old days of crypto. I will cherish them forever.

Community is dead.

Long live community.

İlgili Sorular

QAccording to the author, what is the core difference between early crypto communities and today's so-called 'communities'?

AThe author argues that the core difference lies in the underlying motive. Early crypto communities were driven by a deep, shared belief and passion for the technology and vision. Today's 'communities' are primarily driven by extraction - the desire to farm points, earn airdrops, sell tokens immediately for profit, and then often turn hostile towards the project. They are characterized as cheap knock-offs of the genuine early communities.

QWhat specific action is the author announcing for the Across Protocol Discord server, and why?

AThe author announces that the Across Protocol Discord server will be set to read-only mode, which is the first step in a planned full shutdown. The reason is that their Discord has been overrun by the 'extractive' majority, driving away the genuine, loyal community members. The noise and negativity no longer serve the project's builders and true believers.

QHow does the author define a 'community' in the broader sense, beyond just web3?

AThe author defines a community as a group of people gathered around a shared interest. They provide examples from everyday life such as school, sports, religion, the gym, or even a local grocery store. The author notes that communities can be shallow (like nodding acquaintances at the gym) or deep and meaningful (like close friend groups).

QWhat positive aspects of the early 'golden era' of crypto communities does the author miss?

AThe author misses the authentic 'vibing' on platforms like Clubhouse and Discord, where people discussed crypto topics out of genuine interest, shared experiences, dreamed up new projects, and collaboratively 'built' things. These interactions were based on excitement, innovation, and a shared belief in the project's potential, not just token price. Many real friendships were formed during this time.

QWhat is the primary 'poison' that the author believes has killed the potential of what crypto communities could have been?

AThe author identifies 'extraction' as the primary poison. The current environment is dominated by individuals whose sole common interest is to quickly and decisively extract value from projects through activities like airdrop farming, followed by selling tokens and complaining. This self-serving behavior has corrupted the genuine communal spirit.

İlgili Okumalar

From Somersaults to Working 24/7: We Saw the ‘Working-Class’ Aura in Robots at WAIC

From performing acrobatics to working 24/7: Robots at WAIC are getting down to business. This year's World Artificial Intelligence Conference (WAIC) in Shanghai showcased a significant shift in the robotics industry. While "show-off" robots that dance, play music, or compete in sports are still present, the dominant trend is now practical, task-oriented machines. Hundreds of wheeled and humanoid robots were deployed as guides, baristas, factory workers, and even traffic controllers, moving beyond mere demonstrations to highlight real-world "work capabilities." The focus has pivoted from showcasing technical parameters to pursuing mass production and industrial落地 (landing/implementation). This transition presents major challenges. First, deploying powerful AI models onto robots requires overcoming hardware limitations in computing power and latency. Second, robots demand complex, integrated systems for real-time perception and control. Third, achieving reliable mass production necessitates unprecedented industry-wide collaboration on standards and supply chains. A key bottleneck identified by industry leaders is the robot's "brain"—its AI and cognitive capabilities. While hardware and basic movement ("little brain") have advanced rapidly, the higher-level intelligence for understanding complex instructions and adapting to unstructured environments is progressing more slowly. Companies are investing heavily in developing more advanced "brain" systems, but fully autonomous operation in dynamic settings remains a work in progress. Cost is another critical hurdle. While some consumer-oriented humanoid robots are now priced under $15,000, capable industrial models often cost $50,000 or more. The industry consensus is that bringing robots into unstructured home environments for tasks like comprehensive cleaning is still at least five years away due to technical, safety, and cost barriers. Therefore, 2026 is being called the "first year of mass production," but primarily for industrial and specific commercial applications. WAIC 2026 served less as a stage for spectacular tricks and more as a serious examination of robots' commercial viability, marking their transition from laboratory prototypes to real-world products that must prove their value through stable, repetitive work.

marsbit43 dk önce

From Somersaults to Working 24/7: We Saw the ‘Working-Class’ Aura in Robots at WAIC

marsbit43 dk önce

Live-Action Short Series Forced onto the Big Screen by AI

Live-action short dramas, originally a popular online format, are now attempting to enter the cinema. Several top IPs like "What a Good Girl" and "One Family, Same Class" have received approval for film adaptations. This shift is driven by several pressures within the short drama industry. After rapid growth fueled by low costs and platform support, the sector now faces a slowdown with fewer hits and reduced investment. A major disruptor is the explosive rise of AI-generated short dramas, which dominate new releases and challenge the traditional model with their speed and low cost. Platform policy changes, such as adjustments to revenue guarantees, have further squeezed producers. In this context, film adaptation is seen as a potential new growth path. It offers a chance to extend a short-lived online hit into a longer-lasting IP asset, moving beyond the "fast production, fast consumption" cycle. Established short dramas bring pre-validated stories and emotional appeal to the table, potentially lowering the risk for film investors. However, significant challenges remain. Translating a fast-paced, fragmented viewing experience designed for phones into a compelling cinematic narrative is difficult. Past attempts by popular TV shows and variety programs to make films have often failed due to weak content. A short drama's massive online viewership does not guarantee box office success, as cinema requires a higher commitment of time and money from audiences. Ultimately, the success of these adaptations will depend not on their original popularity, but on their ability to tell complete, emotionally resonant stories that meet the standards of the theatrical market.

marsbit2 saat önce

Live-Action Short Series Forced onto the Big Screen by AI

marsbit2 saat önce

Asymmetry of Algorithmic Agency: When AI Makes Decisions for You, You Don't Even Have the Right to Oppose

As AI increasingly makes decisions on our behalf, a critical asymmetry emerges: the entities deploying these systems understand and refine their algorithms, while individuals merely endure the consequences. This article explores the three layers of this "algorithmic agency asymmetry." First, opacity shields system goals, incentives, and flaws, creating a "black box fallacy" where outputs seem objective. Second, algorithms amplify historical biases, repackaging past inequalities in a seemingly neutral, computational form. Third, recursive systems lead to "algorithmic drift," where users train the system and are simultaneously trained by it, shaping their own choices and behaviors. This asymmetry has profound implications, extending into hiring, education, policing, and daily life. Users adapt to what the system rewards, but only see the end result—a score, recommendation, or price—without understanding the underlying logic or manipulated conditions. To rebalance this power dynamic, the article proposes policy interventions: 1) Meaningful transparency and explainability for users affected by AI decisions. 2) Enforceable impact assessments before deploying high-risk systems. 3) Genuine human oversight with the power to challenge outputs. 4) Mandatory post-deployment monitoring and auditing. 5) Outright bans on manipulative or exploitative systems. Finally, fostering widespread "algorithmic literacy" is essential public infrastructure. Ultimately, this asymmetry is a structural power imbalance. Good policy cannot eliminate it but can narrow the gap by making automated influence visible, contestable, auditable, and governable.

marsbit2 saat önce

Asymmetry of Algorithmic Agency: When AI Makes Decisions for You, You Don't Even Have the Right to Oppose

marsbit2 saat önce

İşlemler

Spot
活动图片