I discovered an interesting phenomenon: over the past two years, nearly thirty tier-one projects have been charity initiatives, among which twenty either have coins that cannot be issued and people don't know what to do, or the coins have been issued but the people have already started new projects.

I found that the commonality of these failed investments is that the mindset during decision-making was "The investment background of this project is pretty good, the founder is well-connected, the narrative is also decent, it shouldn't lead to losses for the investors, right?"

Now let's get to know a new entrepreneur. If during the self-introduction they do not directly focus on "what the profile of our initial seed users is, and what problems we can solve with our features," but instead start to shill resources and paint an idealistic picture, it will basically make people lose the desire to continue the discussion. Of course, I think this kind of person is still the mainstream in the circle.

Entrepreneurs of both paths are not wrong; it's just that the fluidity of the times rewards different people.