"GateLive Roundtable Discussion" 2026 - Issue 3: When X closes a door, how does Web3 pave the way for creators?

“Gate Live Roundtable Discussion” is a Chinese-language crypto roundtable interview program created by Gate Live. It airs promptly every Tuesday at 20:00, focusing on the most discussed industry topics of the moment. The program periodically invites core practitioners and frontline observers from blockchain, Web3, DeFi, Ethereum ecosystem, stablecoins, as well as compliance and policy fields, to join live discussions and in-depth exchanges.

The roundtable adopts a relaxed, open, and authentic dialogue atmosphere, exploring market trends, industry disagreements, and key variables from multiple perspectives, helping viewers form clearer and more rational judgments amid complex market conditions and narratives.

This episode’s theme: When X Opens a Door, How Does Web3 Pave the Way for Creators?

Guests: Well-known KOL in the Chinese crypto community — Mr&强, 独领风骚必暴富, Grace

The content of this program is for information exchange and opinion discussion only and does not constitute any investment advice.

(This content is compiled from the live replay, with text assisted and appropriately edited by AI. For the full content, please copy the link: https://www.gate.com/zh/live/video/92dd32edc187dfe16357b8d3e5e3cee7)

Host Jesse:

Good evening everyone, welcome to the Gate Live roundtable discussion. I am your host Jesse. Every Tuesday at 8 PM, we gather here to focus on hot topics in the crypto market.

Recently, I believe everyone has seen the news that X (formerly Twitter) has massively banned third-party incentive platform APIs, including Kaito. Overnight, content monetization through these platforms has been halted. Many Web3 creators relying on these platforms for monetization have lost direction. Online, some lament, some cheer, but most are confused and reflective.

However, as the saying goes, when one door closes, another opens. Today, we are here not only to discuss this closed door but also to explore—outside the platform-led “walled garden,” is Web3 opening a broader, fairer new world for creators?

Tonight, we are honored to invite three influential guests in Web3 content creation: Mr&强, 独领风骚必暴富, Grace. Welcome all three, and also welcome friends watching live. Feel free to share your opinions or questions in the comments.

Before diving into the topic, let’s have each guest briefly introduce themselves. We’ll follow the order on the poster. Mr&强, please start.

Mr&强:

Hello everyone, friends and teachers. I am Mr&强. I’m very honored to be here in the Gate live studio to share with you. Coincidentally,骚哥 and Grace are old friends of mine. It’s the first time I get to discuss with them together, I feel very privileged.

Let me introduce myself briefly. I’ve been in the crypto space since 2017, an OG veteran. I’ve experienced a lot in the coin world. Currently, I mainly do trading in crypto, US stocks, and A-shares. I also enjoy sharing insights daily. I do some analysis and live trading on Gate, and welcome everyone to join my live sessions.

The industry offers continuous opportunities. We must keep learning, exploring, improving our understanding, and accumulating experience. I hope that myself and everyone here can achieve results in this space. Thank you.

独领风骚必暴富:

Thanks to the host, thanks to Qiang. We are all old acquaintances. Hello everyone, I am 独领风骚必暴富. I am a full-time creator in the crypto space, researching market trends and providing trading strategies, which I’ve been doing continuously for over three years.

My entry into the space was around the same time as Qiang’s, but previously I wasn’t as focused on the entire Web3 ecosystem development. Like Qiang said, learning from excellent people is key. Over the past few years, I’ve connected with many top creators. For the past three years, I’ve been deeply involved in projects, market making, project operations, and market cap management.

If your understanding of the market isn’t clear or if you’re new, you can follow骚哥 on Twitter or search his name on Gate’s platform. Thanks everyone.

Grace:

Thank you, host, and thank you for the invitation. Gate was my first exchange, so I have a deep connection. I started using Gate when I first entered the space. It’s very convenient—buying USDT, Bitcoin—I feel like it was just yesterday. Most of my time is abroad. I enjoy researching projects and hosting live streams, bilingual in Chinese and English. I also like singing; sometimes I sing English songs during live streams. I believe friendly communication is important. Both of these teachers are very professional. I look forward to today’s sharing and hope to learn a lot. Also, I hope fans will follow me, and we can communicate in the live room. Thank you.

Host Jesse:

Thanks again to all the teachers for their presence. Now, let’s officially start the discussion.

First, regarding X banning third-party incentive platforms, some support it, others oppose. What do you think are the impacts on Web3 creators, and how will this reshape the Web3 content ecosystem in the long run?

Mr&强:

First, I want to clarify my stance: I clearly support X’s ban on third-party incentive platforms. Honestly, I predicted this would happen early on—that it was only a matter of time.

Let’s look at this from X’s perspective. X’s core business model is fundamentally advertising. Whether brand ads or various commercial placements, it all depends on one thing: genuine, stable, willing-to-stay users.

The fees paid by many API calls and third-party incentive platforms to X are a tiny part of X’s overall revenue, far less than the long-term value generated by advertising.

The problem is, many accounts rely on “mouth-lip” projects, “task spamming,” and content posting solely for incentives, which dilutes content quality. The ultimate result:—

User experience declines, reader retention drops, browsing time decreases, and ad impressions and conversions fall together.

We don’t need to do the math for X; they can see it clearly from data on user engagement, page views, and ad revenue. From a pure business perspective, banning third-party incentive platforms is a very rational decision.

As for creators, I think this shouldn’t be a one-size-fits-all. The key is: are you a beneficiary?

For those relying solely on mouth-lip tactics and incentive platforms for monetization, this is almost a policy-level “catastrophe.”

Their content isn’t about expression or sharing; it’s about completing tasks and earning incentives. Once incentives are cut off, they must transform.

That’s why you’ve seen many accounts stop posting recently—not because they don’t want to, but because they never had real motivation to create from the start.

For others, the impact is limited. For example, professional KOLs and long-term high-quality content creators. Their monetization paths are diverse: trading skills, consulting, collaborations, brand endorsements, personal IP value. Incentive platforms are just “add-ons,” not “lifelines.” So, this change is more about environment adjustment than survival crisis. The real concern is the long-term impact.

Looking long-term, I believe this is a positive development for X, creators, and users alike, and will deeply reshape the Web3 content ecology.

Why? From the user perspective: Why do we scroll X? Essentially, two words: value. This value can be knowledge, cutting-edge info, cognitive enhancement, or emotional resonance and viewpoints. When content returns to the “value” track, users will be willing to watch, stay, and interact.

From the creator perspective: True creation involves sharing desire, expression, and recognition. When content generates genuine interaction, feedback, and acknowledgment, creators’ sense of self-worth increases, and they are more likely to receive official incentives, brand collaborations, and institutional resources. These ultimately translate into stable, sustainable income.

For platforms and advertisers: high-quality content → high-quality users → more effective ad exposure → more stable business loops. This is a positive feedback system.

In the end, this change will shift the Web3 content ecosystem from “task-driven” to “value-driven.” An ecosystem centered on value can truly promote broader understanding and acceptance of crypto, and gradually expand Web3’s influence within the financial system and traditional world.

From this angle, X isn’t suppressing Web3 creators but helping Web3 undergo a necessary reform. Thank you.

独领风骚必暴富:

Okay, first, regarding X banning third-party incentive platforms, for me personally, as Qiang said, especially for creators like me who have persisted in sharing secondary trading experiences, I support this move. I’ve never been involved in mouth-lip activities on Twitter, never participated from the start. Why? Because I support X’s ban on third-party incentive platforms. Essentially, these platforms earn airdrops, rewards, or incentives from project teams. Think of it this way:

Without third-party incentive platforms, resource allocation would be controlled directly by X itself, which would set rules and regulations to purify the environment.

Third-party platforms just do simple tasks—like providing exposure data for airdrops or promotional info for projects. They lower entry barriers, flooding the market with low-quality, valueless content.

Like Qiang said, if the goal is just to complete tasks for rewards, it negatively impacts followers, content distribution, and user retention. A year or two ago, I still tried to cultivate X, but in recent months, I find my feed full of water content, mostly copied or slightly modified posts, some with a few added comments, others just reposted without responsibility.

For Web3 users—new followers, newcomers, or those outside the space wanting to learn—seeing only such content daily leads to many detours. I personally support X’s ban, and after regulation, the environment can be unified.

Of course, some negative aspects exist, but there are positive ones too. At least, it brings more traffic, new users, and exposure to Web3. Overall, good and bad coexist. After wild growth, such a move is very correct.

Regarding impacts on Web3 creators: if you are a genuine creator, it probably has little effect. Why? Because real creators have their own strengths. External changes won’t affect them much. Maybe they switch platforms or operate on multiple platforms. For me, it doesn’t matter much. I believe true Web3 creators won’t be heavily impacted either. Right?

Like you, if you’re on X, you’ll also post on Gate’s platform. Gate now has over 48 million users. If you have value and an audience, you can still generate income on Gate.

So, for genuine creators, removing chaotic, unoriginal, or AI-generated content is a long-term self-revolution. For example, two years ago, on Twitter, I could leverage my viewpoints to gain followers and earn thousands or tens of thousands. Now, posts are very competitive, but earnings are miserable. Over-competition and task completion don’t produce good creators.

Top creators don’t compete for “entry”; they use their strengths to influence more people and expand their IP. Long-term, this is good. Many content platforms in crypto are trying to find their direction, but X has taken the lead. To attract top creators, platforms must provide a good environment for creation.

As an OG born in 1989, I want Web3 to develop better and bigger. I don’t want the environment to worsen. Many newcomers don’t know how to avoid pitfalls or understand future trends—they only care about airdrops and selling.

For the entire Web3 ecosystem, platform, creator, and user, continuous attention to development direction is essential. Long-term, this is a positive force. I strongly support X’s actions.

Grace:

The deep impact of X banning third-party incentive platforms is twofold: short-term pain and long-term reshaping.

I see this as a “de-bubbling” of Web3 social. In the short term, creators relying on “mouth-lip” and “view farming” will suffer greatly; long-term, it will push Web3 away from “traffic harvesting” toward “content is king” and decentralized social.

Web3’s prosperity on X was largely built on social mining. Users posted daily for airdrops or rewards; projects encouraged interaction for better data. This ban essentially punctures that false bubble. In the short term, it impacts Web3 creators, especially mid- and lower-tier.

First, income models break, and data “deflates.” We’ll see many KOLs’ engagement plummet. A tweet that once had thousands of likes might now only get hundreds. Creators and projects will face a harsh reality: their actual influence isn’t as big as they thought.

But in the long run, this “big cleansing” will fundamentally reshape Web3 content logic:

First, “content is king” finally surpasses “traffic is king.” When traffic from bots and task platforms fails, creators must return to content itself. Only content with depth, insights, emotional or informational value will be naturally recommended by X’s algorithm. This will eliminate many “GM” posters and copy-paste positive news accounts.

Second, it accelerates the rise of native Web3 social platforms (DeSoc). This ban sounds the alarm: on Web2 platforms, you don’t own your followers. This insecurity will push quality creators to try decentralized protocols or build their own private traffic. Creators will realize that putting all eggs in X’s basket is risky.

Finally, to summarize: X’s ban is essentially forcing Web3 to “wean off.” It ends the simple “growth by buying traffic” era and ushers in a more challenging “stock” era. Future Web3 creators can no longer be “traffic intermediaries” but must become “trust nodes.” The current pain is real, but returning to content quality is positive.

Host Jesse:

Recently, major exchanges’ Web3 content platforms have started competing for creators. Do you think these platforms will become the main battleground for Web3 creators in the future?

Mr&强:

Recently, I’ve clearly felt a change: more and more Web3 platforms are actively “poaching” creators. Whether through subsidies, incentives, resources, or exposure, everyone is increasing efforts to attract creators.

But the question is: will these platforms truly become the “main battleground” for Web3 creators?

My judgment: there will be some flow diversion, but unlikely to fully replace.

Let’s start from a basic, realistic logic. “Technology is the primary productive force,” and for creators, that’s skills and knowledge.

In any industry, at a certain stage, high-quality resources tend to concentrate at the top. Talent is the same. Web3 platforms understand this—beyond the product itself, traffic entry points largely determine growth potential.

And where does traffic come from? A big part from influential, capable, IP-rich KOLs and content creators. That’s why you see now, “those who write, speak, analyze, and create content” are hotly contested by platforms. This is a clear sign of creator value becoming explicit.

But if we extend the view to “main battleground,” I lean towards a conservative but realistic judgment: the core battleground for Web3 creators will still be a few top platforms. Reasons:

First, top platforms are sufficiently “friendly” to crypto and creators. Whether X or vertical platforms like Gate, they at least don’t overly restrict crypto content, market opinions, or industry discussions. Freedom of expression is the first threshold for creators.

Second, traffic itself is the biggest moat. The relationship between creators and platforms is symbiotic. Platforms need quality content to retain users; creators need user bases to amplify influence. Once a stable creation habit and content distribution are established on a platform, inertia and scale are hard to shake.

Third, the algorithms, user scale, and monetization stability of top platforms are proven over time. Whether through ads, brand collaborations, transactions, or personal IP extensions, these platforms have established complete commercial loops.

In contrast, many new platforms are still “testing”: high incentives but uncertain sustainability; concentrated traffic but immature distribution mechanisms; long-term monetization remains to be validated.

Therefore, I believe the pattern in the near future will be: top platforms continue as the core for content accumulation and influence expansion, while new platforms serve as supplementary, offering stage-specific opportunities.

For creators, this isn’t necessarily bad. The main battleground handles “long-term value,” while new platforms provide “stage bonuses.” Creators with ability and depth will have more choices in this structure.

But at least for the foreseeable future, the overall “switch” of Web3 creators to new battlegrounds is unlikely. Because traffic, trust, monetization paths, and user habits—once formed—are not easily changed by short-term subsidies.

独领风骚必暴富:

I resonate with this question. I’ve been continuously creating on Gate’s platform for over 3 years, and also sharing on other platforms for more than 2 years. For me, since I focus on secondary market trading, teaching, and sharing, my followers are mainly in this area. So I hope to attract targeted audiences.

Regarding the main battleground for Web3 creators: if you want to be a creator, you need to position yourself clearly. If you focus on trading, you should know where traders gather and how to attract them.

My first platform is Gate. Gate’s platform has the advantage of being early—offering live streams, sharing, and a complete revenue matrix: subscriptions, content mining, live mining, and promotional benefits from top creators. During holidays, we get priority in operational activities and benefits.

If I want to target trading followers, these platforms are suitable. If I focus on project research, maybe my main channels are elsewhere, like Twitter or YouTube. These channels have broader reach, but only a small percentage of followers are the target audience.

Some outside followers want to learn about Web3; they first find you. Gate’s platform has an early advantage. I suggest Gate can attract more top creators by offering sustainable incentives, exposure, and benefits.

From a user perspective, creator perspective, revenue, and platform competition, where should efforts focus? Society is very pragmatic. Top creators won’t randomly choose battlegrounds. They’ll look for the best environment.

If you’re a top creator, you’ll keep updating here. Gate’s early advantage is still there. How to seize this traffic? How to attract more quality creators? Gate can become stronger and better.

I personally have been sharing daily on Gate for over 3 years. I hope it gets better and better. Currently, Gate still has an early lead among competitors. I believe other platforms think so too. I hope Gate continues to grow. Thank you.

Grace:

This is a very sharp and insightful question. Currently, all major exchanges are fiercely “fighting” over content ecosystems. The logic behind this is mainly traffic anxiety and user retention.

I think Gate has been the earliest and most active in building a live streaming ecosystem among exchanges. Live streams are highly interactive, great for trading signals, instant calls, and emotional expression. It also allows discussion of early-stage Alpha projects not yet listed on major exchanges, with significant information gaps. Gate’s early advantage is obvious; creators should seize live streaming opportunities to build followers.

The real value of exchanges—“closest to money”: after analyzing on Twitter, users might just give a like and leave. But on an exchange, after analysis, moving your finger a centimeter to the “buy” button makes a huge difference. Conversion rates are vastly different: 100% of users on exchanges are coin holders (precise traffic). For creators, this is a prime place for rebates, signals, and content monetization. I agree with this view.

Host Jesse:

All three are excellent Web3 content creators. Whether from macro strategies or micro operations, they have their own methodologies. Finally, please share practical tips for tonight’s audience as content creators.

Mr&强:

Everyone here is already an excellent Web3 content creator. Whether doing macro judgments, industry research, or micro operations, everyone has their own approach. I won’t talk about lofty theories, just share my practical experience from “learning by doing.”

First, a fundamental but often overlooked premise: when clarifying your niche and topic, what do you really want? The answer is simple: traffic, i.e., views.

Whether you want followers, conversions, branding, or monetization, traffic is a prerequisite. Without traffic, nothing else matters. So all my methods revolve around how to consistently get traffic.

I summarize my approach into five points:

1. Content is always the core and must be “valuable.” Value doesn’t have to be highly profound; it’s whether readers can “take away something.” It can be informational gaps, cognitive upgrades, practical experience, or emotional resonance.

Many people are not lacking opinions or logic but lack expression skills. No need to stubbornly fight this. We are in the tool era—GPT, Gemini, Grok are your external brains. Your task isn’t to let AI think for you but to feed your ideas into it, making your expression clearer. This process requires repeated training—refining prompts, structure, tone. Over time, you’ll develop a stable, recognizable style.

2. Titles are crucial—sometimes even decide if you get a “first chance.” The role of a title is to let users instantly know what you’re talking about and if it’s worth clicking.

Good content with a bad title won’t get attention. Platforms’ logic favors longer dwell time and higher click-through rates, so titles are the first gate.

3. Visuals are equally important as titles. In fast-scrolling feeds, a good title + image combo determines whether users “expand” and read.

Once they click, the platform perceives your content as having “deep reading value,” boosting your subsequent distribution.

4. Formatting is a way to “steal traffic.” Each platform has a maximum exposure word count before collapsing. The more lines you get visible, the more chances to be seen and stay.

Clear paragraphs, good structure, highlight key points—these help both readers and algorithms. Longer dwell time equals a vote of quality.

5. Interaction is often overlooked. Many creators post and then monitor stats, but interaction is part of content lifecycle.

Replies, discussions, building trust—these create engagement. Users who interact are more sticky, more likely to convert, and more likely to follow long-term.

Interaction should be “warm,” not robotic. Users want a real person, not a cold content machine.

In summary:

Content determines how far you go; details decide if you’re seen; interaction decides if you stay.

These may seem simple, but persistent effort creates positive feedback. Traffic comes, followers accumulate, monetization opportunities follow.

独领风骚必暴富:

Thanks to Grace and Qiang for their wonderful insights, I learned a lot. For me, from the start, I told myself not to overthink or expect to make quick money. I simply share because I love it. I don’t care about platform incentives or hot topics. If you want to be a creator just to earn fast, it might not suit you.

Creating content takes time—summarizing your logic, analyzing feedback, comments, shares, and peer responses. It’s like training an AI. Before AI, I trained myself. This long process may not yield immediate benefits, but if you love it, keep going.

Second, practical tip: keep reviewing your content’s performance. If no one watches, what’s the point? Improve your logic and presentation gradually. It’s a cumulative process.

Third, if you’re considering or already doing content creation, and your current income doesn’t cover your expenses, your positioning might be unclear.

For example, if you focus on trading, know where traders gather and how to attract them. Use platforms like Gate, which has advantages like early live streaming, revenue models, and community benefits.

If you focus on project research, your main channels might be Twitter or YouTube. These have broader reach, but only a small fraction of followers are your target audience.

Some outside followers want to learn Web3; they first find you. Gate’s early advantage can help attract top creators with sustainable incentives and exposure.

From a user, creator, revenue, and platform perspective, where should efforts focus? Society is pragmatic. Top creators won’t choose randomly—they look for the best environment.

If you’re a top creator, keep updating here. Gate’s early lead is still there. How to seize this traffic? How to attract more quality creators? Gate can become stronger.

I’ve been sharing daily on Gate for over 3 years. I hope it gets better and better. The early lead still exists among competitors. I believe other platforms think so too. Let’s keep pushing Gate forward. Thank you.

Grace:

This is a very sharp question. Currently, all major exchanges are fiercely “fighting” over content ecosystems. The logic behind this is mainly traffic anxiety and user retention.

I think Gate has been the earliest and most active in building a live streaming ecosystem among exchanges. Live streams are highly interactive, suitable for signals, instant calls, emotional expression. They also allow discussion of early Alpha projects not yet listed, with information gaps. Gate’s early advantage is clear; creators should leverage live streams to build followers.

The real value of exchanges—“closest to money”: after analysis on Twitter, users might just give a like and leave. But on an exchange, after analysis, moving your finger a centimeter to the “buy” button makes a huge difference. Conversion rates are vastly different: 100% of users on exchanges are coin holders (precise traffic). For creators, this is ideal for rebates, signals, and monetization. I agree.

Host Jesse:

All three are excellent Web3 content creators. From macro and micro perspectives, they have their own methods. Finally, please share practical tips for tonight’s audience as content creators.

Mr&强:

Everyone here is already a top Web3 content creator. Whether doing macro judgments, industry research, or micro operations, everyone has their own approach. I won’t talk about lofty theories, just share my practical experience.

First, a basic but often overlooked premise: when clarifying your niche and topic, what do you want? The answer: traffic, views.

Whether for followers, conversions, branding, or monetization, traffic is essential. Without it, nothing else works. So all my methods focus on how to consistently get traffic.

I summarize into five points:

1. Content is always the core and must be “valuable.” Value doesn’t have to be profound; it’s whether readers can “take away something.” It can be info gaps, insights, practical experience, or emotional resonance.

Many are not lacking opinions or logic but lack expression skills. No need to fight this. Use tools—GPT, Gemini, Grok—as external brains. Feed your ideas into them, improve clarity. Repeatedly refine prompts, structure, tone. Over time, you develop a stable style.

2. Titles are critical—sometimes the first and only chance. Titles tell users instantly what you’re about and if it’s worth clicking.

Good content with a bad title won’t get attention. Platforms favor longer dwell time and higher CTR, so titles are the first gate.

3. Visuals are equally important as titles. In fast feeds, title + image determine if users “expand.”

Once they open, the platform sees your content as having “deep reading value,” boosting your distribution.

4. Formatting helps “steal traffic.” Each platform has a max visible word count before collapsing. More visible lines mean more chances to be seen.

Clear structure, highlights, and good formatting increase dwell time, signaling quality.

5. Interaction is often ignored. Many post and then monitor stats, but interaction is part of content lifecycle.

Replies, discussions, trust-building—these increase stickiness. Engaged users are more likely to convert and follow long-term.

Interaction should be “warm,” not robotic. Users want real engagement, not cold automation.

Summary:

Content determines your reach; details help you be seen; interaction keeps you retained.

Though simple, persistent effort creates positive feedback. Traffic, followers, monetization—naturally follow.

独领风骚必暴富:

Thanks Grace and Qiang for their insights, I learned a lot. For me, I started as a KOL, sharing viewpoints. I told myself not to overthink or expect quick earnings. I just share because I love it. I don’t focus on platform incentives or hot topics. If you want to make quick money, maybe being a creator isn’t for you.

Creating content takes time—summarize your logic, analyze feedback, comments, shares, peer responses. It’s like training an AI. Before AI, I trained myself. This long process may not bring immediate benefits, but if you love it, keep going.

Second, practical tip: review your content’s performance. If no one watches, what’s the point? Improve your logic and presentation gradually. It’s a long-term accumulation.

Third, if you’re considering or already creating, and your income doesn’t cover your expenses, your positioning might be unclear.

For example, if you focus on trading, know where traders gather and how to attract them. Use platforms like Gate, which has early advantages like live streams, revenue models, and community benefits.

If you focus on project research, your main channels might be Twitter or YouTube. These have broader reach, but only a small percentage are your target followers.

Some outside followers want to learn Web3; they find you first. Gate’s early advantage can help attract top creators with sustainable incentives and exposure.

From a user, creator, revenue, and platform perspective, where should efforts focus? Society is pragmatic. Top creators won’t choose randomly—they look for the best environment.

If you’re a top creator, keep updating here. Gate’s early lead is still there. How to seize this traffic? How to attract more quality creators? Gate can become stronger.

I’ve been sharing daily on Gate for over 3 years. I hope it gets better and better. The early lead among competitors remains. I believe other platforms think so too. Let’s keep pushing Gate forward. Thank you.

Grace:

This is a very sharp question. Currently, all major exchanges are fiercely “fighting” over content ecosystems. The logic is mainly traffic anxiety and user retention.

Gate has been the earliest and most active in building a live streaming ecosystem among exchanges. Live streams are highly interactive, suitable for signals, instant calls, emotional expression. They also allow discussion of early Alpha projects not yet listed, with information gaps. Gate’s early advantage is clear; creators should leverage live streams to build followers.

The real value of exchanges—“closest to money”: after analysis on Twitter, users might just give a like and leave. But on an exchange, after analysis, moving your finger a centimeter to the “buy” button makes a huge difference. Conversion rates are vastly different: 100% of users on exchanges are coin holders (precise traffic). For creators, this is ideal for rebates, signals, and monetization. I agree.

Host Jesse:

All three are excellent Web3 content creators. From macro and micro perspectives, they have their own methods. Finally, please share practical tips for tonight’s audience as content creators.

Mr&强:

Everyone here is already a top Web3 content creator. Whether doing macro judgments, industry research, or micro operations, everyone has their own approach. I won’t talk about lofty theories, just share my practical experience.

First, a basic but often overlooked premise: when clarifying your niche and topic, what do you want? The answer: traffic, views.

Whether for followers, conversions, branding, or monetization, traffic is essential. Without it, nothing else works. So all my methods focus on how to consistently get traffic.

I summarize into five points:

1. Content is always the core and must be “valuable.” Value doesn’t have to be profound; it’s whether readers can “take away something.” It can be info gaps, insights, practical experience, or emotional resonance.

Many are not lacking opinions or logic but lack expression skills. No need to fight this. Use tools—GPT, Gemini, Grok—as external brains. Feed your ideas into them, improve clarity. Repeatedly refine prompts, structure, tone. Over time, you develop a stable style.

2. Titles are critical—sometimes the first and only chance. Titles tell users instantly what you’re about and if it’s worth clicking.

Good content with a bad title won’t get attention. Platforms favor longer dwell time and higher CTR, so titles are the first gate.

3. Visuals are equally important as titles. In fast feeds, title + image determine if users “expand.”

Once they open, the platform sees your content as having “deep reading value,” boosting your distribution.

4. Formatting helps “steal traffic.” Each platform has a max visible word count before collapsing. More visible lines mean more chances to be seen.

Clear structure, highlights, and good formatting increase dwell time, signaling quality.

5. Interaction is often ignored. Many post and then monitor stats, but interaction is part of content lifecycle.

Replies, discussions, trust-building—these increase stickiness. Engaged users are more likely to convert and follow long-term.

Interaction should be “warm,” not robotic. Users want real engagement, not cold automation.

Summary:

Content determines your reach; details help you be seen; interaction keeps you retained.

Though simple, persistent effort creates positive feedback. Traffic, followers, monetization—naturally follow.

Grace:

Thanks Grace and Qiang for their insights, I learned a lot. For me, I started as a KOL, sharing viewpoints. I told myself not to overthink or expect quick earnings. I just share because I love it. If you want quick money, maybe being a creator isn’t suitable.

Content creation requires time—summarize your logic, analyze feedback, comments, shares, peer responses. It’s like training an AI. Before AI, I trained myself. This long process may not bring immediate benefits, but if you love it, keep going.

Second, practical tip: review your content’s performance. If no one watches, what’s the point? Improve your logic and presentation gradually. It’s a long-term process.

Third, if you’re considering or already creating, and your income doesn’t cover expenses, your positioning might be unclear.

For example, if you focus on trading, know where traders gather and how to attract them. Use platforms like Gate, which has early advantages like live streams, revenue models, and community benefits.

If you focus on project research, your main channels might be Twitter or YouTube. These have broader reach, but only a small percentage are your target followers.

Some outside followers want to learn Web3; they find you first. Gate’s early advantage can help attract top creators with sustainable incentives and exposure.

From a user, creator, revenue, and platform perspective, where should efforts focus? Society is pragmatic. Top creators won’t choose randomly—they look for the best environment.

If you’re a top creator, keep updating here. Gate’s early lead is still there. How to seize this traffic? How to attract more quality creators? Gate can become stronger.

I’ve been sharing daily on Gate for over 3 years. I hope it gets better and better. The early lead among competitors remains. I believe other platforms think so too. Let’s keep pushing Gate forward. Thank you.

Grace:

This is a very sharp question. Currently, all major exchanges are fiercely “fighting” over content ecosystems. The logic is mainly traffic anxiety and user retention.

Gate has been the earliest and most active in building a live streaming ecosystem among exchanges. Live streams are highly interactive, suitable for signals, instant calls, emotional expression. They also allow discussion of early Alpha projects not yet listed, with information gaps. Gate’s early advantage is clear; creators should leverage live streams to build followers.

The real value of exchanges—“closest to money”: after analysis on Twitter, users might just give a like and leave. But on an exchange, after analysis, moving your finger a centimeter to the “buy” button makes a huge difference. Conversion rates are vastly different: 100% of users on exchanges are coin holders (precise traffic). For creators, this is ideal for rebates, signals, and monetization. I agree.

Host Jesse:

All three are excellent Web3 content creators. From macro and micro perspectives, they have their own methods. Finally, please share practical tips for tonight’s audience as content creators.

Mr&强:

Everyone here is already a top Web3 content creator. Whether doing macro judgments, industry research, or micro operations, everyone has their own approach. I won’t talk about lofty theories, just share my practical experience.

First, a basic but often overlooked premise: when clarifying your niche and topic, what do you want? The answer: traffic, views.

Whether for followers, conversions, branding, or monetization, traffic is essential. Without it, nothing else works. So all my methods focus on how to consistently get traffic.

I summarize into five points:

1. Content is always the core and must be “valuable.” Value doesn’t have to be profound; it’s whether readers can “take away something.” It can be info gaps, insights, practical experience, or emotional resonance.

Many are not lacking opinions or logic but lack expression skills. No need to fight this. Use tools—GPT, Gemini, Grok—as external brains. Feed your ideas into them, improve clarity. Repeatedly refine prompts, structure, tone. Over time, you develop a stable style.

2. Titles are critical—sometimes the first and only chance. Titles tell users instantly what you’re about and if it’s worth clicking.

Good content with a bad title won’t get attention. Platforms favor longer dwell time and higher CTR, so titles are the first gate.

3. Visuals are equally important as titles. In fast feeds, title + image determine if users “expand.”

Once they open, the platform sees your content as having “deep reading value,” boosting your distribution.

4. Formatting helps “steal traffic.” Each platform has a max visible word count before collapsing. More visible lines mean more chances to be seen.

Clear structure, highlights, and good formatting increase dwell time, signaling quality.

5. Interaction is often ignored. Many post and then monitor stats, but interaction is part of content lifecycle.

Replies, discussions, trust-building—these increase stickiness. Engaged users are more likely to convert and follow long-term.

Interaction should be “warm,” not robotic. Users want real engagement, not cold automation.

Summary:

Content determines your reach; details help you be seen; interaction keeps you retained.

Though simple, persistent effort creates positive feedback. Traffic, followers, monetization—naturally follow.

Grace:

Thanks Grace and Qiang for their insights, I learned a lot. For me, I started as a KOL, sharing viewpoints. I told myself not to overthink or expect quick earnings. I just share because I love it. If you want quick money, maybe being a creator isn’t suitable.

Content creation requires time—summarize your logic, analyze feedback, comments, shares, peer responses. It’s like training an AI. Before AI, I trained myself. This long process may not bring immediate benefits, but if you love it, keep going.

Second, practical tip: review your content