Thread by @chriscantino

1/ Who owns web3? 🧵

2/ This grenade of a tweet by Twitter’s dad has fanned the flames.

Whether you agree with it or not, it’s important.

Time to establish nuance around what’s misleading, and what’s true here—and find out who owns web3.

https://twitter.com/jack/status/1473139010197508098?s=21

3/ First, let’s dispense with the us vs. them mentality.

We all know: not all VCs are bad. They help founders shoot their shots.

But we also know why this warning exists. To prevent repeating the flaws of web2. VC is not perfect.

Let’s explore how web3 is improving the model.

4/ Web3 fundamentally tilts towards decentralization. Indie creators and brands, from Poolsuite to XCOPY, are bootstrapping capital directly from their communities.

Does VC “own” them? No.

Compared to web2, we are arcing towards progress—let’s not diminish this innovation.

5/ Web3 is by and large open-source, from code to block activity. Its openness and interoperability establishes the basis for decentralization.

Disclaimer: ownership can also be assigned to off-chain entities.

Still, a major QOL improvement over web2.

https://twitter.com/cdixon/status/1473145207197614082?s=20

6/ Decentralization also enables new defenses.

Because many projects can be “forked” (duplicating their underlying source), participants can simply choose to follow value-aligned derivatives if the original project becomes extractive.

This reinforces incentive alignment.

7/ Constituents can now move markets with coordinated buying and social media activity.

Web3 fundamentally shifts customer roles away from pure consumption and towards community stakeholdership—providing skin in the game and autonomy.

Web3 enables activism.

8/ Let’s also be honest about the downsides of VC in web3.

Simply put, 9/10 VC-backed companies fail.

This is a problem, but it’s also a solution. It means more companies getting to shoot their shots.

Yes, VC is a risky investment class—but it has its place in the ecosystem.

9/ Some startups in particular will need major cash infusion to have any chance at scale—more than they could raise from communities.

Infra layers like Pinata or XMTP, for instance, are well-suited to VC or hybrid fundraising models.

Not everything needs to be community-funded.

10/ However, some VCs have raised outsized capital. This can lead to startups growing too fast, and inflated markups.

Yes, some web3 startups will falter due to misaligned incentives. It’s OK to be skeptical.

But let’s be realistic: VC is a competitive industry like any other.

11/ The alternative is compelling: access to community capital that derisks businesses by creating meaningful network effects.

Bored Ape Yacht Club is sitting on a 9-figure warchest. Bootstrapped. No VC.

For many, this represents an upgrade from traditional financing.

12/ But implying that VC simply doesn’t have a place in web3, or that its incentives are universally incompatible, doesn’t leave room for innovators who need that institutional capital for a real shot at success.

If you’re building today, keep your options on the table.

13/ OK. Now that we’ve established nuance (on Twitter, no less), let’s answer the question:

14/ Who owns web3?

Developers
Miners
Startups
VCs/investors
Users

In short, everyone. But what’s important now is getting the distribution of ownership right.

That’s why Jack tweeted. Because we need people fighting to bend web3 towards decentralization and equality.

15/ Remember: drawing battle lines and stereotyping each other isn't in the spirit of web3. We need nuanced, patient conversation—not scare tactics.

If done right, web3 will succeed in part thanks to VC, not despite it. Much like web2, but now with better incentive structures.

16/ So, what can we do to support the best outcome for web3?

-listen
-explore nuance
-keep an open mind
-encourage collaboration
-embrace decentralization
-manifest gonna make it energy

This concludes today's tweetstorm.