I shared my thoughts about ApeCoin.

TL;DR

I shared what ApeCoin is and how to use it in the crypto space.

Some Takeaway

The idea of ApeCoin is to provide the community with a vote to influence the future development of the community. It is not, unfortunately. It turns out to be financial incentives for holders. Ape NFT is a phenomenon in the NFT community and ApeCoin may become a new way to carry venture capital forward.

NFT VCs

In the past, venture capital poured money into startups and hoped their investment could return within 7 to 10 years. The NFT community makes an exceptional phenomenon to make a return just within a year. Does this become a new trend for VCs? However, the testing of ApeCoin is working.

SEC Apeing

Now the SEC has a worry. How to make a token offering be regulated? It seems The Yuga Labs provide Initial Token Offering to their community members but they did it through holding NFTs.

It blurs the line between financial funding and voting rights in the DAO.

DAO Way to Fast Track

You need to have a company to make a profit. With a DAO, you do not need a business to make profits anymore. You only need NFTs to make communities raise funds for your business. This may be the future model of the business startup.

Voting Ethic

This is rather a philosophical debate. Can one sell or buy votes?

Argument Against Selling or Buying Votes

Selling votes is wrong. It can be seen as corrupt, abhorrent, and distasteful. It is intrinsically wrong because it is immoral to sell your rights. It becomes a tradable good. If the vote is part of human freedom, selling your part of freedom is immoral. But legally, is selling or buying votes violate any type of law? Since slavery is prohibited by law, is selling or buying votes illegal then? In the general view, it is illegal.

Argument Support Selling or Buying Votes

The argument is that if one will forfeit their voting rights because they violated the law or if someone transfers their voting rights to others or someone performs on your behalf to vote after accepting money from you, does it make selling or buying votes permissible then?

Perhaps!

Using land as an example here to demonstrate buying or selling rights.

Forfeiture: if you cannot afford your mortgage, your house will be forfeiture

Transfer: your grandparents transfer their house to you

Perform: you hired people to build a new house on the existing land you own

If you believe your voting rights are the same features as a piece of land.

It is nothing wrong to treat a vote equivalent to a piece of land except it undermines the common good.

Why Common Good Matters

We are living in an extremely commoditized century in which everything has a price tag. Ranging from education, health care, to personal net worth. Everything you literally can put a price at. Unless it is illegal, otherwise, everything can be put at a price.

Putting a price tag on a vote is promoting self-interest rather than a public good.

Because the poor are more likely to sell their votes to the rich. The rich are more likely to have more influence on their side leading to the political outcomes favoring their wealthy living styles.

Unless the vote itself can justify voting for the common good.

Vote for Common Good

This is the case when someone sells their vote for their self-interest to gain profits while whoever buys those votes has the vision to make the community a better place. Such trading of votes is actually beneficial.

So, how to justify the common good rather than promoting a common good for selling or buying a vote?

The outcome cannot harm people in any way if such a transaction is for common good.

Back to ApeCoin

ApeCoin is a voting rights issue for NFT holders. Buying or selling ApeCoin is not restricted to anyone. If someone buys at the highest price and later the price of the value goes to zero, then it harms people in a way that it should not be supposed to. Then, ApeCoin will be determined illegal and the regulator will come to the rescue. If the ApeCoin continues raising the price, everyone will be happy to gain a little incentive even though not everyone holds Ape NFTs, ApeCoin then will be determined legitimacy.

So, how to keep ApeCoin's valuation high all the time?

The Problem with NFT

This is a core problem in NFTs. The valuation is not just speculative, but it is so difficult to keep them in check within the common good purpose. Many projects issue NFTs to raise their funds for their future projects, but do they justify that their project will serve the common good to everyone who participated in the space and behaved well.

History demonstrated that it is IMPOSSIBLE to make one moral. Self-interest will always serve the purpose of the individual rather than the common good.

How can any communities or DAOs keep the common good on track?

I really do not know and that is also a reason that charity organizations keep failing.

In conclusion

ApeCoin is a vote. If ApeCoin serves the common good, it has a bright future. But how to keep their records on the common good is unknown.

I shared my thoughts about ApeCoin.

TL;DR

I shared what ApeCoin is and how to use it in the crypto space.

Some Takeaway

The idea of ApeCoin is to provide the community with a vote to influence the future development of the community. It is not, unfortunately. It turns out to be financial incentives for holders. Ape NFT is a phenomenon in the NFT community and ApeCoin may become a new way to carry venture capital forward.

NFT VCs

In the past, venture capital poured money into startups and hoped their investment could return within 7 to 10 years. The NFT community makes an exceptional phenomenon to make a return just within a year. Does this become a new trend for VCs? However, the testing of ApeCoin is working.

SEC Apeing

Now the SEC has a worry. How to make a token offering be regulated? It seems The Yuga Labs provide Initial Token Offering to their community members but they did it through holding NFTs.

It blurs the line between financial funding and voting rights in the DAO.

DAO Way to Fast Track

You need to have a company to make a profit. With a DAO, you do not need a business to make profits anymore. You only need NFTs to make communities raise funds for your business. This may be the future model of the business startup.

Voting Ethic

This is rather a philosophical debate. Can one sell or buy votes?

Argument Against Selling or Buying Votes

Selling votes is wrong. It can be seen as corrupt, abhorrent, and distasteful. It is intrinsically wrong because it is immoral to sell your rights. It becomes a tradable good. If the vote is part of human freedom, selling your part of freedom is immoral. But legally, is selling or buying votes violate any type of law? Since slavery is prohibited by law, is selling or buying votes illegal then? In the general view, it is illegal.

Argument Support Selling or Buying Votes

The argument is that if one will forfeit their voting rights because they violated the law or if someone transfers their voting rights to others or someone performs on your behalf to vote after accepting money from you, does it make selling or buying votes permissible then?

Perhaps!

Using land as an example here to demonstrate buying or selling rights.

Forfeiture: if you cannot afford your mortgage, your house will be forfeiture

Transfer: your grandparents transfer their house to you

Perform: you hired people to build a new house on the existing land you own

If you believe your voting rights are the same features as a piece of land.

It is nothing wrong to treat a vote equivalent to a piece of land except it undermines the common good.

Why Common Good Matters

We are living in an extremely commoditized century in which everything has a price tag. Ranging from education, health care, to personal net worth. Everything you literally can put a price at. Unless it is illegal, otherwise, everything can be put at a price.

Putting a price tag on a vote is promoting self-interest rather than a public good.

Because the poor are more likely to sell their votes to the rich. The rich are more likely to have more influence on their side leading to the political outcomes favoring their wealthy living styles.

Unless the vote itself can justify voting for the common good.

Vote for Common Good

This is the case when someone sells their vote for their self-interest to gain profits while whoever buys those votes has the vision to make the community a better place. Such trading of votes is actually beneficial.

So, how to justify the common good rather than promoting a common good for selling or buying a vote?

The outcome cannot harm people in any way if such a transaction is for common good.

Back to ApeCoin

ApeCoin is a voting rights issue for NFT holders. Buying or selling ApeCoin is not restricted to anyone. If someone buys at the highest price and later the price of the value goes to zero, then it harms people in a way that it should not be supposed to. Then, ApeCoin will be determined illegal and the regulator will come to the rescue. If the ApeCoin continues raising the price, everyone will be happy to gain a little incentive even though not everyone holds Ape NFTs, ApeCoin then will be determined legitimacy.

So, how to keep ApeCoin's valuation high all the time?

The Problem with NFT

This is a core problem in NFTs. The valuation is not just speculative, but it is so difficult to keep them in check within the common good purpose. Many projects issue NFTs to raise their funds for their future projects, but do they justify that their project will serve the common good to everyone who participated in the space and behaved well.

History demonstrated that it is IMPOSSIBLE to make one moral. Self-interest will always serve the purpose of the individual rather than the common good.

How can any communities or DAOs keep the common good on track?

I really do not know and that is also a reason that charity organizations keep failing.

In conclusion

ApeCoin is a vote. If ApeCoin serves the common good, it has a bright future. But how to keep their records on the common good is unknown.