The trap of incentive mechanisms: How crypto social has turned from a grassroots paradise into a content garbage dump

The crypto social ecosystem is undergoing an awkward transformation. Recently, Nic Carter, known as the “Father of Smart Contracts,” posted on X platform pointing out that incentivized posting platforms like Kaito, combined with AI, have generated大量 low-quality content, and the platform's recommendation mechanism itself has unintentionally exacerbated this issue. He expressed support for X to revoke InfoFi's API access, considering it a necessary measure for platform governance.

Unintended Consequences of Incentive Mechanisms

From Original Intent to Chaos

Nic Carter highlighted core contradictions within crypto social platforms. The original goal of incentivized posting platforms was to encourage user participation and content creation. However, when this incentive is combined with AI-generated content, problems arise. A大量 of low-quality, repetitive, or even meaningless content floods the platform, undermining the quality of discussions.

This is not merely a matter of “bad actors exploiting the system,” but a fundamental flaw in mechanism design itself. When participants can earn rewards by posting, some will optimize their strategies—posting more, using AI to accelerate generation, and lowering quality standards. There is an inherent tension between incentives and quality.

Decline in User Experience

Deeper issues involve the overall atmosphere of crypto Twitter circles changing. Nic Carter mentioned that early on, the fun was in “grassroots gaming,” where ordinary users could gain recognition through in-depth analysis and unique insights. But now, the industry's growth focus has shifted toward stablecoins and financial infrastructure, with narrative power gradually tilting toward institutions and VCs.

What does this mean for ordinary retail investors? They no longer feel they have a “fair chance to participate and turn the tables to get rich.” Enthusiasm naturally wanes. Coupled with the flood of low-quality content, space for professional discussion is severely compressed.

Hidden Damage of Platform Recommendation Mechanisms

X platform's “de-elitization” design has further worsened this situation. The “For You” recommendation feature can boost overall activity, but for professional creators, it’s a trap—no matter how professional your content is, it’s easier for more popular content to be recommended.

This results in a paradox: the chance for crypto professional content to be recommended diminishes, while superficial, emotional, and reaction-provoking content gets more exposure. This further incentivizes the production of low-quality content.

The Necessity of Platform Governance

In this context, revoking InfoFi's API access on X is understandable. It’s a way for the platform to try to control spam and garbage content. Nic Carter supports this, believing such governance actions are necessary.

However, this also exposes a dilemma:

• Fully open access leads to spam and degraded user experience
• Strict regulation may hinder innovative applications and user freedom

Summary

The crypto social ecosystem is experiencing growing pains. Incentive mechanisms are well-intentioned but reveal flaws in execution. Optimization of recommendation algorithms has also produced unintended side effects. The emergence of these issues reflects the industry’s shift from speculative hype to real applications, with all parties still exploring a balance.

For users, in the short term, they may need to learn how to filter valuable information from garbage content. For platforms, the key challenge ahead is how to balance incentivizing innovation with maintaining content quality.