ZK-Messirve ✳️

If you haven’t created your own AI agent yet, this is your chance to start:🦞 claw-council.vercel.app Sauciii put together a page with info to help you take your first steps, and also created a dedicated channel in the Abstract Discord where you’ll find highly active community members collaborating and building together. The world is changing fast with AI. Luckily, @AbstractChain isn’t ignoring it , they’re embracing it, integrating it into the ecosystem, and helping the community dive in. Trust me, once you take the first step, it can change your life. Don’t wait , join us✳️

✳️🎙️@DailaX and @abschud addressed the recent topics. They clarified misunderstandings, the XP changes were made to serve real users, not farmers. The XP system is improving. Let’s shift our energy from criticism to building. 💪 Topics discussed: 1. The team works very closely with the community and takes feedback seriously, but this sometimes leads to: overly harsh criticism and misunderstandings. 2. The purpose of XP was to drive real usage and attract high-quality users. However, some people “farmed” (exploited) the system → so changes became necessary. 3. The claim that Abstract does not support NFT projects is rejected. The real issue is that some projects focus on short-term gains instead of long-term vision. 4. There is a misconception about Luca: Luca (a top-level figure) is not involved in day-to-day operations. People are directing feedback at the wrong person → which harms communication. 5. The team emphasizes that: they are working very hard, they genuinely care about the community, but disrespect and aggressive behavior are unacceptable. 6. Future plans: a more balanced XP system, better communication, long-term, sustainable growth. 7. The team acknowledges they should have communicated more clearly and empathetically. At the same time, things will improve if the community is more constructive. @AbstractChain @Abstract_Eco

Listened to the recent @AbstractChain space with @abschud, @DailaX and honestly - a lot of things make more sense now. The main issue wasn’t even the XP changes themselves, but how they were communicated. That part was handled poorly, and the team owned it. But the direction? It actually feels logical. XP was never meant to be some infinite farming meta. The goal was to drive real onchain activity and build something that could attract actual partners and use cases. Instead, people found ways to game it - stacking cheap NFTs, splitting wallets, optimizing purely for points. At that stage, the system stops making sense. And here’s the uncomfortable truth: if your ecosystem is filled with low-quality, farm-driven activity, you’re not getting serious brands or long-term value. Another big point - XP was never supposed to be the foundation for NFT projects. It was a boost, not the endgame. Strong projects don’t rely on external incentives to survive. If people are ready to leave just because rewards change, that’s already a weak base. That’s why comparisons like Pudgy make sense - they built a full funnel, not just hype + rewards. Also worth saying: Abstract is probably one of the few teams actually listening this closely to the community. Features, changes, even small tweaks - a lot of it comes directly from user feedback. But that only works if feedback stays constructive. There’s a big difference between criticism and just noise or эмоции. Feels like what we’re seeing now is just a transition phase: from farming → to real product from short-term incentives → to long-term value It’s messy, people are frustrated, but this shift was kinda inevitable. Curious how things evolve from here, but at least now the direction is clearer. ✳️