Building the Collective Mindset of Web3 Projects

In 1981, 16-year-old Shi Yongxin entered the nearly forgotten Shaolin Temple. At that time, there were only 9 monks in the temple, struggling to make a living through farming and incense offerings. The turning point came a year later: a kung fu movie exploded nationwide, and the ancient temple became the focus of public attention overnight.

Shi Yongxin precisely captured this "mindset dividend". He did not invent kung fu, nor is he the most skilled martial artist, yet he achieved a groundbreaking brand positioning: he deeply embedded the mental imprint of "Shaolin Temple = Chinese Kung Fu" in the minds of global audiences.

In the following decades, he systematically organized martial arts classics, promoted performances abroad, carried out cultural dissemination, and created commercial licensing, starting from a religious site and transforming Shaolin into the global "Kung Fu recognition" entry point. More importantly, this recognition does not stop at "cultural influence," but ultimately translates into real profit: tickets, IP, real estate, intangible asset management... recognition has become the entry point for business.

This is the power of "collective mindset": when you leave a clear and unique label in the minds of users, you qualify to tell stories, set prices, and exist long-term.

The Relationship Between Collective Mindset and Web3 Projects

Web2 focuses on business, of course, looking at market share, that is, the proportion and scale of your users in your vertical track. Because traditional business, whether in terms of valuation or the business itself, cannot be separated from the direct competitive power in the market after the product is implemented. As for Web3 projects, I personally believe that the project's "collective mindset ownership" greatly exceeds "actual possession rate."

But "focusing on the mindset of the target audience" is not just an empty phrase; it runs through every stage of the project from 0 to 1, especially at the key node of TGE. After TGE, liquidity will be available, and the operational logic of the project will change dramatically. You are no longer just telling stories and attracting attention; you will start to face the real market's pricing, arbitrage, and competition. This shift is very intense, and if you are unprepared, all the enthusiasm and expectations from the early stages may collapse rapidly within a few days.

Therefore, the project team must think ahead: what kind of user mindset should you seize before the TGE? What narrative should you tell? What position should you place yourself in the minds of the users?

How should the project team build a "collective mindset" before the TGE?

For most Web3 projects, TGE is the first time to step onto the public market stage. However, what really determines success or failure actually happens before the TGE. This stage is a golden window for you to capture users' minds. It is not only about whether the token can be successfully launched, but also about whether you can use this "collective attention moment" to plant a cognitive label in users' minds that can be remembered for a long time.

How you clarify the project's positioning, solidify trust, and stabilize expectations during this period determines whether you can attract genuinely valuable early participants. Otherwise, what you may end up with is not a launch, but an end.

I usually suggest that projects that haven't had their TGE yet conduct a "three mental questions" self-check first:

1. Which Tier do you belong to in the eyes of the user?

Are you a top player in this field? Or a fringe project? Behind this is actually a very realistic formula:

User's understanding of your project's Tier = Expected value of your TGE = Willingness to invest how much time to pay attention to you = Your actual data performance, etc.

Your actual data performance and user engagement are often the external results of users' subjective perception of whether you are "worth betting on". These do not solely come from what you have done, but more from how you "appear in terms of tier ranking".

What exactly do users remember about you?

This may be the most commonly overestimated point by Web3 entrepreneurs. Many teams present their projects with tight logic and clear structure, but after listening for twenty minutes, I still find myself asking: "So what is your breakthrough?"

Reality is harsh. In this incredibly fragmented market, there are countless projects promoting themselves every day, and you shouldn't expect users to truly understand you. They will only remember a few keywords that evoke associations and generate emotions. Therefore, you must simplify and ultimately distill all content into three things that users can "take away": easy to remember, capable of sparking imagination about making money, and related to future explosive potential.

Speaking human language is the most lacking ability in most projects.

3. Can group trust be stable?

How to create a project that is trusted by users? This is the most easily overlooked point and also the most easily penetrated layer.

Even if you have strong skills and great storytelling, once users start to question your persona, team, and behavioral patterns, trust will collapse, and their mindset will automatically unanchor.

The collapse of trust often isn't due to major issues, but rather the accumulation of seemingly insignificant small matters. For example, when a user asks a question and receives no response, even after asking several times it falls into silence; when rewards were promised to be distributed at a certain time but are delayed repeatedly without any explanation; when someone in the community starts to question, and the team collectively plays dead or coldly says, "We will discuss internally"; or sometimes, even when the project appears to be well-articulated from the outside, there are whispers that "this is just a round of arbitrage."

Each of these things may seem small, but it's this feeling of "saying one thing and doing another" that can gradually erode the initial trust of users, especially those early supporters. They were originally your most valuable assets, the ones who truly believed in your story, but once a crack in trust appears, they are the quickest to leave and the least likely to return.

Just as when the whole world mentions Chinese kung fu, most people's first reaction is not Wing Chun, Baji, or Tai Chi, but rather: Shaolin. Wing Chun is not bad, but it hasn't welcomed its Shiyongxin. You need to be the one who establishes a collective mindset for the project.

After the TGE, the project officially enters the "financial asset" status.

After the TGE, the project is no longer just a product, vision, or story, but has become a financial asset with a price, liquidity, and secondary trading. Whether you are valuable, worth buying, or capable of appreciation, begins to be validated in the most public and cold manner.

The first change is in the user structure. Those early users who once shared ideals with you, ran test networks, and were active in the community have also undergone a transformation in their identities. They are now both users and traders. And a larger wave of traders has just entered the market. They are not here to "listen to your stories," but to ask a more direct question: "Does this coin have a chance to make money?"

Web3 rarely has "irreplaceable products." Even if you do 20% or 30% better than competitors, as long as the coin price remains stagnant and the market doesn't fluctuate, you will still be quickly abandoned. Users won't give you time and patience to grow; they will immediately chase that project that "looks like it can rise more."

Therefore, the project party must answer a question directly: why would others want to buy your coin?

Behind this, it actually corresponds to three typical user mental models:

Low-level player: My product is good. User: Whether it's good or not doesn't matter, anyway I'm not afraid to buy.

The most common mindset for such projects is: "We have leading technology, good product experience, and a serious team." But the market will not reward you just because of your hard work.

User reactions are usually: "No matter how well you say it, is there any volatility? No? Then I dare not buy."

This is a typical case of "separation of product value and financial value". In Web3, there are only products without price elasticity, which cannot support user trust. You may be a builder, but in the eyes of users, you are just a "coin with no expectation difference".

The reality is that product experience is no longer a scarce commodity, but the price expectations that can capture attention are.

So you need to understand: you think you are building a product, but in fact, you are competing for the mental entry point of financial sentiment.

Mid-level players: I have good news, I'm pushing the market. Users: Just speculating in the short term, I'll run as soon as I make a profit.

The vast majority of Web3 users are short-term speculators. They do not aspire to co-build in the long run, but as long as you have pump, rhythm, and positive news, they will come in to participate.

They are not believers, let alone community evangelists. But as long as you create "tradeability", they will come in for a round.

This is not a bad thing. On the contrary, it shows that you have "movement". Users know that you are a project that can make waves, and even if they can't hold on tightly, it is worth keeping an eye on.

As long as you can successfully pump a few times, the market will start to assume you are a "promising" coin. Your token will be added to users' watchlists, and there will be a group of people specifically waiting for your next move.

From no one paying attention → to someone participating → to someone keeping an eye on it, this is the gradual process of establishing the "price elasticity mindset" in Web3.

Advanced players: Make users feel that "this coin is worth holding, once sold, it won't be possible to get back in."

The most ideal, and also the hardest mindset to establish in users, is when they actively choose to hold onto your coin during a liquidation. What arises in their minds is not "can I make quick money," but rather: "This project, I might still need it in the next round." "This coin, once it rises, I might not be able to buy it back."

To reach this level, the project must establish a complete "Trust × Expectation × Feedback" loop, meeting at least four conditions:

· The project's long-term direction is clear, and the narrative will not jump around repeatedly;

·Product progress is rhythmic, and users can see hope;

· The project team has positive news, and the coin price is not weak.

The coin price is resilient, creating an emotional elasticity of "if it goes up, there's more to discuss; if it goes down, it can still be pulled back up."

This token may not skyrocket every day, but users know in their hearts, "you are an asset worth participating in for the long term," so they will naturally hold, spread, and maintain it.

SUI: A Real Case of Cognitive Reversal

Take a recent coin that I put into a long-term target: $SUI. Let's break it down.

SUI boasts a luxurious team (the product research team of Facebook's Meta project), and its primary market valuation of several billion dollars has also made it a FOMO target for major investment institutions. To be honest, I thought SUI's performance was not good in the early stages of TGE; the overall sentiment in the community was that the project team was arrogant and disconnected from the community. It wasn't until a year and a half ago that SUI suddenly realized the importance of the community, continuing to promote the ecosystem with one hand while engaging the community with the other. As for the secondary level, I won't say much due to regulatory issues.

Everyone knows what happened next. Suddenly, SUI became the "Little SOL" in the market's mindset. It squeezed in, and users were willing to hold the asset long-term.

In fact, Sui has already experienced two events this summer that tested market confidence: first, in late May, an ecological project encountered a security incident, resulting in the depletion of approximately $223 million in liquidity pools; second, at the beginning of July, there was the unlocking of 44 million tokens worth nearly $200 million, which was one of the largest releases of the entire quarter.

According to the usual rhythm, such a series of negative events should have led to a price crash and a collapse of community sentiment. However, the result was the opposite: SUI not only was not abandoned by the market, but instead rose to $4.39 the day before yesterday, reaching a new high since February of this year, becoming one of the most actively traded projects in the sector.

Why did it withstand? The key is not only that the Sui team did not avoid negative situations like hacking incidents, but also that they quickly took responsibility. What is truly important is that over the past year, Sui has gradually changed users' perception of it through actions, slowly transforming the originally criticized image of being "arrogant and indifferent" into one of a "trustworthy project worth long-term staking."

Taking the attack on ecological projects as an example, although this risk was triggered by a third-party smart contract, Sui is not directly responsible. However, the team did not pass the blame; they immediately suspended the relevant contracts, froze two involved wallets, collaborated with Sui validator nodes to initiate a vote, and jointly arranged loans with the Sui Foundation to raise compensation funds, promising "full compensation" to the victims. In the end, 90.9% of validators voted in favor of releasing the $162 million frozen assets, and the compensation plan was successfully passed.

The entire process is transparent, rapid, and highly effective, which has made the outside world truly realize more than once: this team can withstand pressure and is willing to take responsibility at critical moments.

What it demonstrates to everyone is: as long as you establish clear mental anchors in the early stages.