W
@waleswoosh
You missed the part where I get free money
52
0
5
4.4K
Community Sentiment Analysis
Real-time analysis of public opinion and engagement
Sentiment Distribution
76% Engaged
46% Positive
30% Negative
Positive
46%
Negative
30%
Neutral
24%
Critical Perspectives
Community concerns and opposing viewpoints
1
Projects ripping off creators
Many replies blast projects for changing reward rules last minute, paying “peanuts,” dumping tokens and leaving creators unpaid or with vested crumbs — people say this damage to creators is the platform’s biggest problem.
2
Platform policing creators while projects go unchecked
Commenters accuse Kaito of obsessing over AI, reputation filters and creator slashing, yet failing to enforce promises or vet projects — that imbalance is framed as hypocrisy and a core grievance.
3
Algorithmic bias favors wealthy/CT accounts
Users claim the new rules and reputation gating let big-money or coordinated accounts dominate leaderboards, making it nearly impossible for small creators to earn yaps or break through.
4
Demand for clearer verification and reward transparency
Repeated calls for formal project verification, explicit reward timelines and stronger protections for creators — many urge the team to publish policies and policing standards that actually protect users.
5
AI hypocrisy and ridicule
Replies mock the announcement as AI-generated while also admitting AI can’t be fully stopped; the conversation is full of sarcasm about using AI to police AI and about low-value airdrops.
6
Frustration, distrust and warnings of decline
A steady stream of warnings — creators threatening to leave, claims Kaito is “losing relevance,” and predictions that continued neglect of creator harms will harm the platform’s future.
7
Some levity and scattered neutral notes
Between the outrage there are memes, sarcastic quips, a few practical references (e.g., Arbitrum distribution dates) and requests to hire community advisors to fix things.
8
Ultimatum
fix InfoFi or face fallout: The tenor ends with a stark call — community members want concrete action (policy fixes, project accountability) or they’ll stop creating and stop trusting the platform.
K
@KaitoAI
We are also rolling out an update where Wale is given free money
28
0
7
3.1K
D
@dee_nftarmy
Unrelated, Arbitrum do distribute rewards on 11th This time no news kek
10
0
7
732
Supporting Voices
Community members who agree with this perspective
1
Hold projects accountable
Replies demand strict rules and enforcement so campaigns actually deliver promised rewards — users want transparent, black‑and‑white reward rules and penalties for projects that shortchange creators.
2
Onchain verification and reputation gating are widely seen as the best defense against bots and AI slop, with calls for follower net‑worth checks, zk proofs, tiny stakes and slashing to preserve signal
Onchain verification and reputation gating are widely seen as the best defense against bots and AI slop, with calls for follower net‑worth checks, zk proofs, tiny stakes and slashing to preserve signal.
3
Protect creators from failed projects
Many ask for mechanisms that shield creators when projects ghost or underpay, and for projects to be vetted and rated before they run campaigns.
4
Don’t lock out small creators
There’s anxiety that minimum reputation or net‑worth thresholds could exclude newcomers; users want growth pathways so rising creators aren’t permanently sidelined.
5
Better comms and ops
Repeated requests for clearer campaign rules, fixed leaderboard rewards before launch, and more regular platform updates to reduce confusion and drama.
6
Mixed praise with cautious optimism
Plenty of supporters applaud the direction and iterative updates, but many stress that execution and consistent enforcement will determine success.
7
Concrete feature asks
Suggestions include per‑user leaderboard caps, project reputation verification, KYC‑adjacent privacy options, and openness to third‑party integrations or collaboration to improve filtering.
R
@R2D2zen
. Please also focus on: >better comms >strict rules for projects >black and white rewards rules >better ops for Kaito platform ( not updated regularly) If you only increase the rules for the creators but you keep the same NO accountability rule for projects, not looking good for 202
63
0
5
1.9K
0
@0xxNathan
I think there also needs to be a strong focus on project selection. - transparent rewards preferably providing value equivalent to $. - protecting creators from cases where projects fail to deliver on their commitments.
7
0
1
549
R
@rubyscore_io
hey, @KaitoAI! If you need someone who can effectively filter users by Onchain Score, we would be happy to collaborate. We already have a ready-made system that takes into account user behavior in more than 80 blockchains.
5
0
1
222