[doogerdog]

Molly provides a great service to skeptics like me. She concise, easy to read, articulate and funny.

I feel like I live in a world where a huge train wreck is getting set up. I would like to follow along but it has gotten to the point where I can't get myself to read many of these 'News' stories about a new crypto adventure. I only have a little news reading time in a day and the typical article about NFTs or whatever leaves me feeling assaulted by a hype machine. But I can peruse web3isgoinggreat and stay abreast of what is going on.

Molly obviously has an opinion about the future of blockchain money but her comments all seem factual and fair to me. I'm pretty sure I would read her site even if I were on the other side of the argument.

[_zllx]

> I would read her site even if I were on the other side of the argument

It's been a great resource to confirm that I'm not falling for the most obvious scams (like NFTs or BNB chain scams which constitute a majority of web3isgoinggreat posts) nor investing in easily exploited projects. She perhaps inadvertently helps the cryptocurrency space by pointing out scam artists to avoid working with. There is a world of good going on outside of the typical bored ape garbage in the cryptocurrency space. You would be getting a raw deal if relying solely on her for cryptocurrency information.

[d13]

It’s a brilliant site, but definitely cherry-picked for entertainment value. It’s only a small part of the whole picture and provides a very distorted view

[cuteboy19]

People shilling crypto are heavily incentivised to cover up the negatives or pretend they don't exist. Every crypto news site is basically paid news. Even when they publish negative articles, it's usually because they are shilling an alternative. The journalism quality is terrible.

The site is probably the most neutral crypto view out there, just because the author has no perverse incentive

[dqv]

>The site is probably the most neutral crypto view out there, just because the author has no perverse incentive

"Most neutral" is a weasel word and incentives aren't solely monetary. The author not having any obvious incentives is not the same as having no perverse incentives.

When they start grappling with someone in the same "weight class" (rather than some NYT author who has a journalist's level of understanding) and open themselves up to rebuttal, then "most neutral" might start to make sense. As it stands now, it's just preaching to a choir of crypto skeptics.

[cuteboy19]

What other incentives could there be? They aren't doing it for money or fame. Maybe you could come up with some irrational reasons.

I am not saying that she is perfectly neutral. That is not possible. I am just saying that the most neutral source of information on crypto that you can find often comes from sceptics, just because they aren't the ones being paid to lie.