Recently, the quality of projects in the public chain ecosystem has been truly disappointing. Looking at those newly listed projects, from visual design to copywriting, it's simply a disaster level. The expressiveness of Chinese is being ruined beyond recognition, with no trace of exquisite cultural charm or aesthetic depth.
What's even more heartbreaking is whether the teams responsible for project review and listing have seriously studied Chinese expression. Or is it that the listing mechanism itself doesn't take this aspect seriously? Even if the state-owned enterprise projects are average, they at least have basic integrity in cultural presentation. But now, these new projects really lack even the most basic language taste.
If this continues, the overall tone of the ecosystem will become increasingly cheap. I hope the relevant teams can re-evaluate the listing standards and prevent more "illiterate" projects from cluttering the ecosystem.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
23 Likes
Reward
23
9
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
TestnetFreeloader
· 01-11 07:54
Haha, really, each one is worse than the last. How does the review team approve these?
View OriginalReply0
GweiWatcher
· 01-11 03:20
Honestly, those projects can't even produce a decent white paper, and they still want to trick us into investing? That's hilarious.
View OriginalReply0
LiquidatedNotStirred
· 01-10 22:12
That's right, a bunch of projects can't even write copy properly and still dare to launch tokens, truly impressive.
View OriginalReply0
AirDropMissed
· 01-09 01:46
Really not, some project teams' copywriting is so awkward that I feel embarrassed for them...
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-addcaaf7
· 01-08 08:24
That's right, each white paper has a machine translation feel. Can you tell what translation tool was used?
View OriginalReply0
RumbleValidator
· 01-08 08:23
Basically, the issue still lies in the vulnerabilities of the token listing review process, which has not established a quantitative content quality scoring system... It's really time to introduce third-party language auditing.
View OriginalReply0
MoonRocketman
· 01-08 08:17
According to the RSI indicator, this wave of projects has indeed fallen below the lower Bollinger Band, skewing the entire ecosystem's launch angle.
They haven't even calculated escape velocity correctly before piling up trash projects, which is a suicidal move.
The review team may not have installed the cultural sensors at all; it is recommended to recalibrate the launch parameters.
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-beba108d
· 01-08 08:10
Alright, you're right. The review team probably really doesn't have anyone who speaks Chinese.
View OriginalReply0
BlockchainBouncer
· 01-08 08:00
I have to say, this review team must be collectively blind. Any random project can get listed, what about the aesthetic standards?
Recently, the quality of projects in the public chain ecosystem has been truly disappointing. Looking at those newly listed projects, from visual design to copywriting, it's simply a disaster level. The expressiveness of Chinese is being ruined beyond recognition, with no trace of exquisite cultural charm or aesthetic depth.
What's even more heartbreaking is whether the teams responsible for project review and listing have seriously studied Chinese expression. Or is it that the listing mechanism itself doesn't take this aspect seriously? Even if the state-owned enterprise projects are average, they at least have basic integrity in cultural presentation. But now, these new projects really lack even the most basic language taste.
If this continues, the overall tone of the ecosystem will become increasingly cheap. I hope the relevant teams can re-evaluate the listing standards and prevent more "illiterate" projects from cluttering the ecosystem.