Dogecoin Founder Slams Vitalik’s Creator Coin Proposal
Creator coins clash ⚔️Ethereum creator Vitalik Buterin has proposed a new way to rethink creator coins. But Dogecoin co-founder Markus wasted no time shutting it down. Here’s why the debate matters. Read on.
Quick Summary
- Vitalik Buterin suggests DAO-driven creator coins focused on quality, not hype.
- Dogecoin co-founder Markus says creator coins are beyond fixing.
- The clash highlights deep flaws in crypto-based content incentives.
Creator coins are once again under scrutiny after Vitalik Buterin published a long-form post outlining how he would redesign them. His take comes after years of failed attempts across crypto social platforms, many of which promised to reward creators but ended up fueling speculation instead.
Buterin argues the core problem has changed. “In the 20s, there’s plenty of content,” he wrote, adding that AI can already generate massive volumes cheaply. “The problem is quality. And so your goal is not incentivizing content, it’s surfacing good content.”
To make that point, he points to Substack as the strongest real-world example of creator monetization working. While far from perfect, Buterin says its success comes from active curation rather than tokens. He notes that Substack deliberately seeded its platform with strong writers and even offered revenue guarantees, instead of letting market hype decide who rises.
By contrast, Buterin criticizes creator coin platforms like Zora and BitClout, saying the top tokens usually belong to people with existing social status. According to him, “the top 10 are people who already have very high social status,” often for reasons unrelated to the quality of their content.
His proposal moves away from universal creator tokens entirely. Instead, he suggests small, opinionated creator DAOs that are not governed by tokens. These groups would be hand-picked, style-specific, and limited in size to keep decision-making practical. The idea is to build a trusted brand around quality creators rather than chasing mass adoption.
Tokens still play a role, but in a different way. Anyone could launch a creator coin, but only creators accepted into a DAO would see part of their DAO earnings used to burn their tokens. As Buterin explains, this prevents speculators from playing a “recursive-speculation attention game backed only by itself.” Instead, traders would be betting on which creators DAOs are likely to accept.
Not everyone is buying it. Markus responded bluntly, saying, “i think creator coins are an inherently flawed concept that just leads to dead tokens like the other 11,000,000 tokens released a year and it’s not worth trying to fix.”
His comment reflects a wider frustration in crypto. Even with better structure, critics believe creator coins still risk turning audiences into exit liquidity, with little lasting value once attention fades.
For crypto casino players and iGaming users, creator tokens often appear as promos or influencer-backed campaigns. This debate is a reminder to look past branding and ask whether a token offers real value or just short-term hype.
This article is not financial advice. Cryptocurrency investments carry risk, and readers should conduct their own research. Gambling involves risk. Play responsibly, never chase losses, and seek support if gambling negatively impacts your life.
