Solana and the founders of Base Coin start a debate: the content on Zora has 'basic value'

A verbal battle about the value of "creator tokens" swept across the crypto social circle. Base and Solana's two major public chain helmsmans faced each other heads headed by a fierce debate around ZORA and Pump.fun, instantly igniting the discussion craze on Crypto Twitter.

Where did this gunpowder-filled confrontation come from? Let's find out.

Controversy broke out: Sterling Crispin attacks Zora

The fuse of the storm was Del Complex researcher Sterling Crispin publicly bombarding Zora on social platforms.

Zora is a social protocol on the Base chain, focusing on tokenizing user homepages and content, with the goal of allowing creators to monetize their works directly.

But Sterling didn't buy it. He believes that Zora is essentially just a new packaging for the old concept. He bluntly pointed out that most tokens issued on AMM, with thin liquidity and exponential price trends are essentially "skin-changing air coins".

In his discussion with netizens, he took Pump.fun as an example: "The median result of the ERC20 token on Pump.fun is not a loss, but a complete return to zero."

As soon as this was said, Base founder Jesse Pollak quickly fought back. He responded on the X platform: "You are wrong. The content itself has value and the creators deserve respect." He further emphasized: "Equipping Zora with Pump.fun's tokens is a serious logical mistake. Not all tokens are the same, fundamentals are the key."

However, this defense did not calm the controversy, but instead attracted the intervention of another heavyweight - Solana co-founder toly.

toly suddenly entered the game, and the war spread

toly retweet Jesse's tweet on X and leave a meaningful comment: "Can the tokens on Zora get a share of the future income of the creator?"

(Note: "lol wut" is an online term, often with a tone of contempt or pretending to be puzzled, implying that the other party's views are absurd or difficult to understand.)

At this point, the front battle between the two public chain leaders has officially started.

Round 1: Is the content "intrinsic value"?

Jesse insists: content has its own basic value.

toly asked: Then how do you prove it? Can token holders get advertising share? Are there any cash flow interests?

Jesse responded: There is more than one way to monetize. Just like a painting, even if no one buys a ticket to visit, its artistic value still exists.

toly: According to your logic, will the creator sells tokens be beneficial to retail investors? Because they can "buy the basic value of content at a low price"?

Jesse explains: The tokens on Zora are diverse, but the core is consistent: they form a continuous and open game system, and user behavior directly affects ecological evolution.

Round 2: Each person has his own opinions, no one can accept anyone

toly responded sarcastically: So what you call "basic value" is actually equal to zero.

Jesse does not give in: If you insist that the content is worthless, then it's up to you. But I believe that the content itself is extremely precious, and we can completely build new mechanisms to return the value to hundreds of millions of creators.

toly The last blow: Then you go and convince the coin holders to let Coinbase use profits to buy those Zora tokens that are almost zero. After all, they are "lower than the intrinsic value of the content".

The confrontation ended with Jesse's reply to a "OK" and seemed to have come to an abrupt end, but in fact the aftermath was not settled.

It is interesting that although toly has promoted the meme coin ecosystem on Solana in recent years, it emphasized in this battle: "I have always said that meme coins and NFTs are digital waste and have no intrinsic value. They are like unboxing props in mobile games, and players around the world spend up to $150 billion a year."

Where did Zora's "independent market" come from?

As the center of this debate, Zora not only received strong endorsement from Jesse Pollak, but its native token $ZORA has soared 883% in the past 30 days. This wave of upsurge is due to the dual benefits of the launch of content tokenization function by Base App and the launch of Binance's ZORA/USDT perpetual contract.

Data shows that yesterday, the total number of creators on the Zora platform reached 21,478, of which 12,292 new creators were added, and the number of tokens issued exceeded 50,475, and all three indicators set a new record.

But the data on the chain reveals another side. According to the on-chain analyst AI, in spot trading, Coinbase is $ZORA's largest trading platform, with a 24-hour turnover of US$82.6 million; while in the contract market, Binance's 24-hour turnover of US$1.354 billion, 16.4 times that of spot.

She pointed out that $ZORA seems to have gone through a round of independent copycat market, but there has not even been a single large-scale spot transaction on the chain for more than $500,000 recently, and it is suspected that CEX funds have dominated the price trend.

Source: Aunt AI

The fierce confrontation between Jesse and toly not only exposes the cognitive gap in the crypto industry about the essence of "creator tokens", but also reflects the dispute over value concepts behind different public chain ecology.

There is no winner in this debate. Just as the definition of value itself, it always has repeated tug-of-war between idealism and reality logic, belief adherence and rational doubt.

The above is the detailed content of Solana and the founders of Base Coin start a debate: the content on Zora has 'basic value'. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!