Thoughts on the value of marketing

Don’t get me wrong I hate marketing as much as Bill Hicks, but this isn’t a fidget spinner so I am okay with it. I don’t think everyone on the nay side of the arguement is apathetic but as you’ve pointed out there’s some folk on here that seem vehemently against any form of promotion. That’s at least certainly how it comes off when people offer no alternative solutions or ideas, only criticism. This can be especially harsh for people who put time and effort into marketing as it undervalues them.


Marketing can be philosophical and is certainly in some areas a black art with morality removed.

Some will say every single thing you do is Marketing, every thought, every word you write, every conversation etc.

That is all BS.

So “getting the word out” is something, but “Getting the word out honestly” is another, i.e. do we want to sell tobacco to kids? with good enough marketing we can!

Then there is P.R. An arm of the philosophical art, another arm in the war of persuasion.

Then we have promotion, paid listings, paid ads and the like.

So if everything is marketing we cannot say we don’t do it, never mind need it :wink:

I feel where we are we can ponder and pontificate about all this for eternity.

My own feeling is that we do “spread the word” and we do it honestly!

I don’t think anyone disagrees with that, but there is a further question we need to address.

In a hostile and dishonest environment how can you remain morally true and let good people know about a solution you feel is in their interest without falling into sludge.


People will criticise anything, often vehemently, and not necessarily because they are right or have a sound basis or even thought about the issue first, especially online. I think it’s difficult to ascribe motives or reasons that aren’t explicitly stated so no point getting lost in that.

I think the best approach in any endeavour is to be upfront, listen to what comes back and ignore stuff that is not helpful, especially when it’s from people who don’t think first, don’t give sound reasons and especially if they aren’t being constructive.

Early in my career I overheard my boss on the phone say, “there are people who bring problems and people who bring solutions”.

This was a massive wake up call for me as I recognised I tended to take problems to him without first thinking about what I could do about them. I had been doing this because he was so good at solving stuff, a very bright guy, same age as me but co-founder of a software start-up that was growing rapidly. So I didn’t think I could do as well as he, but decided I should at least try before going to him for advice unless I really needed it. It’s amazing how that previous habit was restricting my growth, creativity and most of all self esteem and satisfaction, and of course it was what he wanted from me!

So I have advice for anyone, like that early me, who doesn’t think they can contribute because others are better, brighter, more experienced etc. Have a go first, see what you can do with a problem. I think one reason people criticise rather than contributing is this. It’s a way of hiding that sense that you can’t do it yourself and others are better, and instead we criticise them. In fact, they got there by trying, failing and learning, and ignoring ill founded criticism. :wink:

So always have a go, be upfront, listen to what comes back and ignore anything that’s not helpful!


We all want the same thing: a liquid market for efficient price discovery of the true value of Safe Network token (MaidSafeCoin in the intrim) which most of us agree is well north of here.

I would only add that risk plays a big part in this space. Not your keys, not your coin has come a long way since 2017, but it appears many have not got the memo or yet been burnt enough times to learn their lesson.

P2PB2B has so many red light warning signs even those willing to take high risks would be leery of leaning into it. There are a lot of examples such as this, but this one is lightly better documented and timestamped than most:

Notorious for listing and delisting coins. Suddenly you are notified by an email that a coin you hold has or is going to be delisted, with little notice and no prior warning. You log into withdrawal, however there is an extremely high minimum required, followed by an outrageous withdrawal fee. So if, you don’t currently hold that minimum, then too bad, as they have already disabled trading and deposits, making it virtually ‘impossible’ to withdrawal and ultimately losing your entire balance.

Credible projects with merit do not, have not, payed for listings on shady exchanges.

The core problem as I outline in second part of post here is that the Omni protocol is greatly limiting the options for accessing liquidity and allowing true price discovery. It can be solved simply in a short time frame: Follow Algorand project playbook out of the Omni quagmire to ERC20. Note @JimCollinson: This is not the same as Wrapped Omni-Maid which is more complicated with more moving parts, requires trust in a third party, and carries much higher risk for everyone.

With a Maid-ERC20 holders of even a small amount can earn fees by providing liquidity on $50 billion monster DEX exchanges like Uniswap and earn a return while holding their Maid - waiting for the Safe Network to come into its own and build trust over time that it can secure value (A process that took years for some projects!).

@BambooGarden obviously moves and knows the Ethereum space well and could perhaps provide a more credible opinion to MaidSafe on the benefits of 1 to 1 Omni Maid to ERC20 swaps done by MaidSafe, not some complicated third party wrapping hack work around. This might be the single most helpful short term project for the Bamboo Fund: help connect this project with the wider community of decentralised network participants and the liquidity required for true price discovery.


This is total BS and you have no idea what the cases where. Maidsafe has a contract stating the the rules for delisting. If they delist us, it’s because we didn’t meet these criteria.

These criteria aren’t unreasonable either, they mainly involve things as volume, spread and legal issues. If you get delisted, you got yourself / poor communication to blame.

Additionally, higher tier exchanges have the same reasons for delisting. But they just don’t list you even if they doubt for 1% you wont neet their criteria in the future.


Two years ago 50% of the community wanted a full transition to ERC20 MAID. I wonder what percentage supports this at the moment. Do you want to run such a poll?

Privacy. Security. Freedom


I wonder who did the Algorand transition work? Could that be a community project?

IMO We run the risk of poll fatigue here :wink:


50% of the small portion of the community who voted, when asked if they ‘wanted ERC20 MAID’, voted yes. Their options when voting were yes or no, and there was little to no information about how long and/or difficult it would be beside the poll. There was also this comment from @piluso towards the end which was very much appreciated by everyone and, at the time, I thought summed up the sentiment:

"On the other hand, you have the other clean option:

  • Focus 100% of the energy of the team on the launch of the network.
  • Once the network is ready for launch, negotiate with the exchanges once to integrate to the SafeNetwork, so the native token can be traded there.
  • The team will have now the time to focus on the planning of swapping and considering all the edge cases that it may encounter.
  • Officially make the public announcement and the PR campaign about the launch of the network, with the token swap, alongside the names of the exchanges that accepted to list the official native token.
  • People who are excited about the swap will be excited to test the new network, and won’t be disappointed. People who were skeptical about the network will have to swallow their cynicism.
  • (and now that will have the official Safecoin vs the scammy Safecoin, and it will be much easier to direct people to the right one when you only need to discern between two options)"

No criticism here @Dimitar, just if you’re going to link the poll with only that information I think the other side’s argument should be heard, and people mightn’t have the time to go read through it again.

The argument as it stands is only stronger now in my eyes, as we revel in the glories of a functional testnet.

Our US friends now have market access, there’s a testnet to shout about, the forum is buzzing with testing and old characters popping back up, new faces popping in out of nowhere, we’re on the brink of optimisations and tweaking and UX, BGF will be rolling soon, there’ll be time soon for a few interviews I imagine and more AMAs and such, press kits are ready so presumably a few articles will be popping up, price is at ATH levels - what’s the stress? Where exactly is the fire? I don’t see it.


My personal opinion is that there will be a safe token on centralized exchanges until the first suicide due to revenge porn published forever or the first child porn that can never be deleted. From then on, the media will start a war against us, and this whole argument with the centralized exchanges goes in the trash. The only future for the safe tokens are the decentralized exchanges…

Privacy. Security. Freedom

1 Like

Marketing is a tool nothing more. How it is used determines wether or not is a black art or lacking morality.

Forces as old as time are against individual Privacy, Security, and Freedom. If Safe Network is delivering these concepts to regular folk then there is a war with those that want to eliminate these concepts from humanity and those that want to preserve and protect them. P.R. has to be used to face these forces. Safe Network’s P.R. is vying for the attention of those being targeted by these Forces. P.R. is a tool how it is used determines whether or not it’s moral.

We don’t want to get stalled out pondering and pontificating. We’ve had our fill of that. Humanity is under attack now more than ever before in history. They are targeted with the best known techniques to convince them that Privacy, Security, and Freedom should not be in the hands of the individual.

Why does this have to be difficult? We remain morally true by not using Fallacies in our marketing and P.R. As much as humanly possible we speak logical truth. If we succeed our messages to folk should be simple and clear. They will go right to the heart. We will speak truth to them using every proven technique. We can avoid the Sludge by being by stripping our marketing and P.R. of fallacious concepts. Such marketing will be a refreshing change for regular folk who are bombarded by manipulative techniques that try to bend their will.

How do you see us spreading the word? How do you envision the approach? When do you want to start?

We have people in our community that are experts in marketing. How to we not waste their time and get useful work done in the direction of Marketing and P.R. starting now?


Saying it does not make it true. Marketing can appeal to philosophical base concepts and realities that challenge the normal and prompt people to think about how the world could be better for them. There are “forces” who do like change but it’s a war of attrition with reality and corrupt interests fall away over time.

That is back to front! Reality is solidly behind those concepts - they are basic attributes that follow from the social contract and not imposing stupidity on other people. It’s a corruption that thinks otherwise.

and there are you noting the art of war… philosophical one.

That’s a confusion but there are certain propaganda units used to drive corrupt interests forward and they are truly toxic for what they do and how. Still, those who have no regard for reality or for others and want to force their will, cannot win the arguement against reality that calls for individual freedoms… and those include privacy; security; and broader freedom to choose.

“P.R.” is just a notion of communication… it is a tool, if you want to phrase it that way but the morality is linked to the agent that invokes it and the error or not of that intent.

“They” sounds conspiratorial… and much of what we are faced off against is just a sign of the times - dull thud of academic minds tempting simple stupid solutions to complex problems… and of course a run of incompetence and ignorance from those with power, too often.

Exactly this… align with reality … be brave and great forces will come to aid.
Actions aligned with reality are easily than those at odds with it… and the arguements that follow too.

Keep it simple… and avoid the politics and tribal fallacies.
Privacy; Security; and Freedom, for all… is simple.

Beyond this, I would suggest necessarily follows a need to see that users have power to choose… to choose what they see and not… and what that becomes is a “tool”. So, there is a challenge there for seeing content filters and methods for that. I wonder it’s not difficult to sum opinions on content to see effective options that empower the users. But first the basic network needs to be reliable, then next layers can be wondered at.

Dimitar’s post above is oddly motivated by fear of what others will do but the point to take away from that is similar for what will be useful to marketing… a bit of variety and flexibility goes a long way to providing robust response to challenges.

So, the answer to the question is to mirror it back…



You do know there is porn on the bitcoin blockchain and nothing to stop more of it?


We already have and I have been for 14 years now. There are many ways to do this and assuming any way is valid is IMO opinion wrong. The folk who do Marketing or PR for tobacco / poisoned water / keeping slavery and more for kids and the poor will all use your arguments.

I am not saying you are wrong I am saying you are not correct in every application of what Marketing or PR is. It can be good or it can be evil and keeping it good is not a small feat. This is regardless of the experience or capability of the Marketing folk. The companies above have probably the very best Marketing and PR. So it’s not about capability and never saying we have good marketeers makes it right.

It is all about the shared vision. So here is some questions to show you the issue!

  • We have an option of sneaky or (even) slightly misleading PR/messaging that rockets the price 100X, do we do that?

  • We can stay honest and not do the above, but still put out the messages and the price halves, now what do we do?

Now lets change it slightly

  • We have an option of sneaky or slightly misleading PR/messaging that rockets the price 100X, but has almost no users, do we do that?

  • We can stay honest and not do the above, but still put out the messages and the price halves, but the network is used by millions of previously disenfranchised folk, now what do we do?

None of these has any bearing on the capabilities of those spreading the message, but they are questions we must face continually and thinking we can get 100% agreement on these from any reasonable size group is wrong.


Or, a project can regularly engage with its community and not go essentially quiet for a year at a time. A project could also ensure that it is listed on a healthy number of exchanges to make sure people who want to participate can do so easily. A project can invest in shipping releases with accessible documentation and UX/UI. A project could make it a point to keep its relationships warm with the press and exchanges as well as other potential business partners. A project could invest in making sure its community is welcoming.

I raise these examples to highlight that marketing isn’t actually an enigmatic, occult art. It’s literally just practical and wise business decisions to boost awareness, engagement and influence. All the above are examples of effective marketing strategy. None of the above need be “immoral”.


No marketing needs to be immoral. That is the point. The rest about project engaging etc. is all stuff we already do on a weekly basis. The rest are issues we stated categorically the team would not do until launch.

We need to be careful of “the project” meaning MaidSafe when it suite and then any comment on marketing that is emphatically true, even if negative, is not defended by some attack on “the project”. Surely you can admit there is bad marketing, not bad or incapable marketeers, but bad and evil professional marketing!

No need to be confrontational about this point, it is valid and real with no debate.

[edit I also think @Sotros25 you completely missed my point there ]


First of all: my response is in response to more comments than just yours.

Confrontational? Any time I post anything about marketing, many people come at me with guns blazing. While I’m thankful to the people who help to push back, they are often quickly attacked themselves. You know it’s bad when people spontaneously and privately send you messages about the toxic treatment, hoping you won’t burnout and quit.

This was supposed to be a thread celebrating an exchange listing and look at what it’s devolved into…

If I wanted to be specific to MaidSafe I would have said MaidSafe.

Let’s set aside the condescension in the above. Obviously, yes. To do otherwise would be like saying all knives are good. A knife is neither good nor evil. It is a tool that could be used to either end.


Indeed !! …

I may be bad at English but if you can tell me what is condescending about the statement you quoted I would be grateful!.


Yes exchanges are good, and marketing can be great too.

Be honest though, stay moral, keep making the point of how the network is for humanity first. This is how any hugely successful business works. And this is the immense advantage MAID has right now: its reputation.

It will succeed through solving problems of humanity, like saving the environment from BTC. If it focusses on the good it is doing first, the result of this is will be profits.

Stay on this message, because there are many outlets that are not in the crypto bubble, that will pick up on this messaging.

I have ideas of where to promote the safe network outside of crypto.

And these independent Youtubers who have huge followings, will really like the environmental messaging behind the safe network. Plus they have many followers who follow their investment advice, and are always looking for the new, and cutting edge, up and coming companies, that need support in order to save the planet.

If Safe wants to resonate with these tribes, messaging has to remain honest, moral, and progressively inspiring. We must look outside the crypto box. The potential low power computing requirement that the safe network offers, on ARM processors, is a huge advantage that should not be overlooked. Because people are worried about the future of the planet. Just some food for thought.


This is a really critical area we absolutely have to get some focus on. The risks as I stated above of returns verses integrity are more real in crypto that any other part of the possible users in my opinion. So whilst great and early adopters, there is also risk in staying too focussed there. So a spread is absolutely going to have to happen.


Is that where you start the messaging? Why start going after niche groups before you exposed the low hanging fruit? There doesn’t always need to be an obligation to win on both the tech and the moral compass.

1 Like