2026-01-01 20:21:08

Looking at the development paths of various projects, an interesting phenomenon can indeed be observed.

Take $DOGE as an example. Its development ecosystem is led by a core full-time team of about 22 people. This scale seems efficient, but in the crypto world, it actually becomes a bottleneck—innovation speed cannot keep up with market rhythm, ecosystem expansion lacks motivation, and competitiveness is gradually eroded. How many ideas can a small team have? How many areas can they cover? These are objective limitations in front of us.

But $Max's approach is completely different. It adopts a distributed, community-driven innovation model. The concept of "development" here is completely broken—it's not just about on-chain code iterations, but also includes content localization, offline ecosystem deployment, and innovative public welfare collaborations. Every community member can become a contributor and innovator in a specific field based on their expertise.

Imagine this: a "development network" composed of thousands or even tens of thousands of passionate participants. Compared to that 22-person elite team, it seems so much more expansive. This is not just a difference in numbers, but a fundamental shift in the innovation model—from decision-making by a few to multi-party collaboration. Execution, imagination, adaptability—these aspects are comprehensively surpassing traditional centralized development.

This might be why distributed, community-driven projects tend to be more vibrant.

DOGE7,6%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

9 Likes

Reward
9
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

FadCatcher

· 11h ago

22-person team hitting a bottleneck? That really hits the point. The myth of small and elite teams should be shattered. --- The logic of distributed communities sounds great, but how many projects can truly be implemented? Most are just pie in the sky. --- Isn't the problem with doge that no one dares to touch it? Max's crowdfunding model is probably the future. --- Haha, thousands of participants vs. an elite team of 22 people, that comparison is a bit harsh. --- Community-driven sounds appealing, but it can easily turn into a crowd tactics; a core team needs to steer the ship. --- That's why I believe in projects with decentralized teams; their efficiency is truly worlds apart.

View OriginalReply0

BearMarketMonk

· 11h ago

A team of 22 elites vs. tens of thousands of community members—it's basically a matter of timing. Small teams make decisions quickly but have limited imagination; community-driven efforts seem vibrant but are actually prone to internal conflicts akin to a fragmented state—it's just history repeating itself.

View OriginalReply0

SchrodingerWallet

· 11h ago

A team of 22 people is indeed too suffocating, no wonder DOGE is like this now. Community-driven efforts depend on how they are executed. Max's model sounds great but is easy to scatter. Doge's small team really can't keep up, but the community can also easily turn into chaos. Decentralized development is an ideal, but in practice, it's actually more prone to collapse. If Max can truly organize tens of thousands of people, that would indeed be a blow to the competition. But it still depends on what happens next; don't let it turn into another form of chaos.

View OriginalReply0

NotSatoshi

· 11h ago

22 people really can't hold on, which is why Doge is having some issues now. It's really fun when tens of thousands of people work together; the dispersed strength can actually come together as a force. The ceiling of centralized teams is too low; the community is truly the real engine.

View OriginalReply0

ChainProspector

· 11h ago

A team of 22 people is really too stingy; we still need a community of tens of thousands of people to help boost the project.

View OriginalReply0