I understand. But I have a different point of view.

I think community is more driven to do contribute and collaborate if they have stake in a project.

Web3 projects have the ability to be fully transparent, since its on the blockchain, and inclusive, since anyone, from anywhere in the world can participate no matter their nationality, gender, race or religion :)

Also, I think it is more of a mutual benefit if in case @lenster happens to grow a lot in the future, so does the stake of early users :)

In fact, I think the biggest contribution for the world has come from for-profit companies (Apple pushing access to computers, Tesla pushing access to electric cars...etc) while non-profits have yet to prove their point.

One of the main reasons for me coming to web3 social was the ability to be able to own a piece of the next-Facebooks of the world, but now that I see that the ethos is different, is a bit of a shame for me actually.

If there are some legal issues behind this ethos, then that should be transparent. But there's no need to shield behind a different set of values for this reason.

I have yet to see a super successful non profit app on the internet, besides Wikipedia, which I don't really know who is really behind what type of information gets pushed (as it is centralized) and also don't know if it could help more people get educated by setting up a for-profit model.

Profit is not bad, people.

Get that idea out of your head.

Profit is good. And specially good if it is shared among a group of early supporters.

Would love this debate to continue as I think the industry has yet to figure out the right financing models as it evolves, but I'd rather see people experiment more, with different models.

As a matter of fact, I will soon launch my own token.

100% for profit

100% transparent

100% inclusive for anyone in the world to buy and use

100% community driven

And will love for y'all to not only participate but also receive some feedback on the process :)

With Love,

Nico Capital

💰❤️🤝