RE: AMA: "Blurt 2.0"

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

AMA: "Blurt 2.0"

in blurt •  4 years ago 

One of the idea that intrigued me about your leadership was the idea of there being multiple projects with airdrops. I ask why not do that with this, and continue this project alongside the new one? I know that time is valuable, however this would be a great demonstration that your vision not only works, but rewards those of like mind who commune with your heart and intent.

Seems that is where we are headed.

But I do wish to give you the counter example, I guess as a leader, I've never really had anything but bad experiences with leaders in the graphene ecosystem and seen a ton of infightinng and the like.

So I've got to ask myself:

  1. Is it worth it personally to be exposed to this kind of filth?

Short answer: No

Long answer: I've no regrets about launching Blurt.

  1. Should I ask the community to take that risk?

Short Answer: It don't feel right to do so.

Long Answer: Blurt is alive, graphene-blurt. Thing has a pulse! I do eat meat, but I sure don't want to kill it.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE BLURT!
Sort Order:  

Sounds great idea, keep the BLURT graphene based chain, but I'm guessing the new COSMOS chain could be air-dropped in some form.

Excited about the world of Cosmos

Proportional airdrop with different total supply. I'm happy you like this idea.

1% stake == 1% stake

Airdrop requires user action.

New chain will have only one kind of key.