The protocols are often distinguished as decentralised or not based on the extent to which they can be regulated and shut down. The presence of VC backed Pre mines, ICO’s, CEO’s and companies behind social media blockchain protocols generally are key indicators and criteria as to wether or not they are decentralised. Ability for non tech people to earn the token via a fair playing feild distribution mechanism such as POB should also be a key criteria. I see you have somewhat addressed this in section 7. But this is simply not applicable to platforms, only to social media blockchain protocols.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
That was added under wealth distribution.
Depends how the platform uses the blockchain tech, to what extent, for what exactly.
You cant split them in Web2.5 and web3. If you wanted to do that you would not only have to develop a methodology to determine what web2, web2.5, web3 is, but you would then have to draw a line where you can objectively say something is web3 or not.
Since web2.5 exists in your view, that shows that you cant draw that line, thats why the 0.5 is there.
Those are vague terms, that dont really mean anything, or rather mean many different things to many different people, but what you can do is develop a framework to judge them on the same basis.
Decentralization categories can be objectively set and determined for each, lets call it, "project".