During this period, my main focus has been on the Genesis Launches of the Virtual platform, so I have been paying attention to various information, including comments from many participants involved in the platform's launch.
Over the weekend, I saw a post on Twitter (link provided in the "Reference Links" section), and I believe the issues it raises are worth our careful consideration and examination.
I have extracted three statements from this post that I find particularly noteworthy to share with everyone:
1 "Do the tokens launched through Genesis Launch have real value?"
This participant raised many questions in the post, and this is one of the key issues. I feel that many of these questions can actually be observed and thought through to find answers.
When participating in a project, participants should certainly ask as many questions as possible, and ideally, the project team would be able to answer these questions.
However, in reality, for various reasons, project teams often find it difficult to satisfy the questioner. Some teams only partially answer questions, while others simply do not respond at all.
Some eccentric entrepreneurs sometimes ignore "seemingly simple" questions. Yet, such entrepreneurs can sometimes create miracles. It would be a pity if investors miss opportunities by believing the project is problematic due to such "perfunctory" attitudes.
I'm not saying the project should refuse to answer these questions, but rather that investors should be more prepared to find answers themselves, rather than pinning all their hopes on team responses.
Moreover, the team's answers in specific situations may not truly reflect their inner thoughts. Some unscrupulous teams may deliberately conceal their true thoughts in certain contexts. Therefore, even if the team answers questions, investors should not rely solely on these responses to make decisions, but should conduct their own in-depth investigation and research.
Therefore, from any perspective, investors should learn to find answers themselves, beyond focusing on a single team response.
Where to find these answers?
Look in the project team's past statements, expressed viewpoints, and project whitepaper.
Regardless of whether the team deliberately conceals information or "glosses over" in a Q&A, past experiences and historical records are difficult to fake or evade.
Fraudulent teams will inevitably reveal their true nature in past experiences and records; teams that seem "perfunctory" will also express their genuine thoughts in their historical experiences and records.
Therefore, for investors, the ability to find answers from the project team's past history, statements, and expressions is crucial.
If one only waits for the project team's response without actively seeking clues, they will definitely step into a big trap in the long run.
2 "Seven days later, the award-winning project @solacelaunch from the Virtual protocol hackathon will launch. I believe this is one of the most anticipated projects among all those meeting Genesis Launch conditions."
In my experience, projects with high expectations beforehand may not necessarily perform well afterward.
This is not necessarily a problem with the project itself, but more like a "metaphysical" phenomenon.
Therefore, I usually maintain a certain level of caution towards such projects. If I like and see potential, I will participate, but without too high expectations. If I'm not interested or don't see promise, I won't participate even if it's "widely anticipated".
For example, I didn't participate in several recent hot projects on Genesis Launches like NAINCY, MANEKI, NYKO, and AXR: either I was less interested in their tracks, or I felt these tracks were already very crowded and these projects lacked obvious distinctive features.
3 "I have invested more than half of my assets in $VIRTUAL and agent tokens."
I believe this is the most critical aspect this investor needs to pay attention to when participating in this project.
So far in the AI + Crypto track, Virtual is the project I most recognize, but even so, its risks cannot be underestimated.
Investing half of one's assets in such a risky project is somewhat like gambling.
Of course, if this investor truly believes they understand the project thoroughly, can clearly see its development and potential in the coming years, and has no doubts, then making such a heavy investment is not impossible.
However, it's obvious that this investor does not understand the project that well, otherwise they wouldn't have so many questions waiting for the project team's response, and their questioning tone clearly reveals anxiety and unease. Additionally, this investor has probably not done much homework to research the project, as the answers to their questions are not difficult to find through self-research.
In fact, the best approach for investors in this situation is: control yourself and invest nothing. Because of the fear of missing out (FOMO), rushing into a project they don't have much confidence in and can't control the risks could be disastrous.
