The Dilemmas and Reflections on Community Building in Crypto Projects

In the current cryptocurrency market, new projects generally face the problem of their tokens losing value immediately after listing. To tackle this challenge, some project teams have adopted strategies such as pre-controlling the supply, airdrop staking, and lock-up mechanisms, attempting to create a better market performance in the early stages of token listing.

However, these practices reflect the project's misunderstanding of its own community. They equate the community with a potential source of selling pressure, believing that community members are the main factors leading to a decline in the token's price. This perspective raises a key question: why does the community that the project team has carefully built ultimately become a source of selling rather than buying? If the community is merely a source of selling pressure, then what is the significance of investing a large amount of resources into building the community?

In fact, many project teams lack a deep understanding of the essence of community building. Their motivation for building a community often stems from meeting exchange listing requirements rather than genuinely cultivating a loyal user base. This leads to the "community" being reduced to cold numerical metrics, with project teams pursuing rapid growth and a large number of members while neglecting community quality and long-term value.

A mature community growth model has formed in the market, including various task platforms, social media tools, and collaborations with opinion leaders. These methods attract a large number of users through low-threshold participation and airdrop incentives, achieving what is known as "organic growth." However, this strategy often attracts a significant number of speculators whose primary aim is to obtain airdrops, rather than supporters who genuinely care about the project's development.

If the goal of the project is merely to quickly list coins and exit, then this method of community building is indeed efficient and direct. However, this also explains why many projects' communities have become sell-side rather than buy-side. The original intention of the project team determines the final outcome—they seek users who can provide data support, while the purpose of user participation is to obtain airdrop rewards. Both parties are aware that this relationship lacks substantial value, yet it is maintained due to their respective needs for superficial harmony.

Therefore, when the tokens are officially issued, those tokens acquired through airdrops naturally become a source of selling pressure. The project team needs to revisit its community building strategy, focusing on cultivating genuine project supporters and long-term value creation, rather than pursuing short-term data growth. Only by establishing a community composed of users who truly trust and support the project can a stable buying support be formed at the time of token issuance, achieving sustainable development.