4 ms·

I think the criticism is due to your use of buzz words, broad sweeping claims and abstract concepts that require knowledge of and acceptance of lots of supporti

I think the criticism is due to your use of buzz words, broad sweeping claims and abstract concepts that require knowledge of and acceptance of lots of supporting concepts that are highly contested; you then combine these semantic tools in to some apparent theory of how things should be but without a concrete conclusion that is clear in terms of what your recommendation actually is so it feels like a lot was said but nothing actually communicated. For example, what is “future illusion of revenue”. Why is the word illusion there? Are you challenging the existence or classification of revenue? Of money? Of commerce? Or accounting? I can’t tell. Why is the word future there? Are you challenging old business models that will be replaced by web3? Highlighting the emergence of a post money economy? I don’t know what you mean by including you those buzz words. So they feel like fluff to create apparent sophistication but in reality have no meaningful conceptual value. They don’t move the argument forward towards a conclusion.

vmception 5y ago
Thanks for breaking that down from your perspective. It wasn't a reference to any crypto/money ideology at all. It was a reference to how many companies had or have zero revenue but would imagine gaining great valuations based on the existence of users, and their ability to monetize those users, and acquiring those users cheaply. This is pretty much a hallmark of Web 2.0. This had the competing goals of having a funnel or path of users to become interested and follow to merely signing up (or actually paying for something), while also counting how long those users stayed with the goal of increasing how long they stay while reducing the areas they drop off or bounce, investors know there isn't revenue and also are in line with the idea that users will be monetized in the future. A lot of times it never happens, hence illusion. The KPIs are metrics used to woo investors based on the data collected about how users stay in the funnel. OKRs are meetings about how to increase the KPIs. I don't consider those buzzwords, I consider them actual words/acronyms referring to useless drivel in that industry. Hope that helped you or someone.

vmception 5y ago

Thanks for breaking that down from your perspective. It wasn't a reference to any crypto/money ideology at all. It was a reference to how many companies had or have zero revenue but would imagine gaining great valuations based on the existence of users, and their ability to monetize those users, and acquiring those users cheaply. This is pretty much a hallmark of Web 2.0. This had the competing goals of having a funnel or path of users to become interested and follow to merely signing up (or actually paying for something), while also counting how long those users stayed with the goal of increasing how long they stay while reducing the areas they drop off or bounce, investors know there isn't revenue and also are in line with the idea that users will be monetized in the future. A lot of times it never happens, hence illusion. The KPIs are metrics used to woo investors based on the data collected about how users stay in the funnel. OKRs are meetings about how to increase the KPIs. I don't consider those buzzwords, I consider them actual words/acronyms referring to useless drivel in that industry. Hope that helped you or someone.