With the 3AC, Hodlnaut fiascos, and Staci Warden’s absolutely unacceptable behavior on twitter, we’ve had many people say something to the effect of “Staci/The foundation is not the blockchain, the blockchain is decentralized.”
For the past few days, I’ve been thinking, “so what is the purpose of the foundation then?” The tech side of Algorand is done by the Inc… Why do we have a foundation?
The answer is actually fairly obvious when you start to think about the question: The only reason the Foundation exists is to bring adoption to the Algorand Blockchain.
Now, yes, it’s also there to distribute Algos to make the chain more decentralized, but that’s a fairly easy job, there’s no need to spend millions of dollars hiring dozens of expensive TradFi executives to do that.
So clearly, the main purpose, the mission statement, the goal of the Foundation is to bring adoption to the chain.
Staci Warden claims she has a great team, and that her team is working very hard… but where are the results?
Let’s face it.
The Foundation has failed to bring in ANY adoption to the chain whatsoever.
Before you try to argue with me and tell me that’s not true, think about it for a minute:
Virtually every single member of the Algorand Community is in it because of Silvio, MIT and the tech.
We don’t see this in ANY other chain; how many supporters of Solana even know of Raj or Anatoly? What about Avalanche’s community? Or Cosmos? Or NEAR? Or Fantom?
Silvio is literally single-handedly carrying the entire chain. Even the FIFA partnership was done through Silvio, not the foundation.
What has the foundation done to increase adoption in the chain? Lame 1800s style billboards? Fortune cookies? Some Times Square stunt that got ridiculed by the crypto community and criticized or ignored by the rest?
Okay, you can mention the ACE program and how they collaborate with certain Universities. But, what results have we seen from those? What tangible results have we seen in terms of adoption?
“Think long term” you say?
But why is it that other chains have seen immediate results and have gained developers and users?
All of these excuses, like “Algorand is a newer blockchain, we’re in a bear market, Algorand isn’t EVM so it’s harder to gain developers”…
They’re all just excuses. Solana, Avalanche, Fantom are all new. Cosmos is gaining great traction in the bear market. Solana and NEAR are both not EVM.
Not enough marketing?
In fact, outside of the algorand community, we’re starting to see people view algorand as the the chain that wastes huge amounts of money on marketing short term and doesn’t care about long term sustainability.
And I can understand that. I’ve never seen any other chain that has to resort to fortune cookies or that times square stunt. Or 100 million dollars in some drone racing league that no one watches.
So why is it that Algorand is not gaining any traction?
It’s not because of Silvio, and it’s not because of the tech, certainly.
But whatever it is, one wonders, when the only job of the foundation is to bring adoption to the chain, and they’re full of competent, hard working people… why have we not seen ANY results whatsoever, other than 3AC, Hodlnaut, and Staci Warden viciously attacking the community on twitter?