Collective Mindset: The Winning Key for Web3 Projects

In 1981, 16-year-old Shi Yongxin arrived at the nearly abandoned Shaolin Temple. There were only 9 monks in the temple, barely surviving on farming and incense offerings. A turning point occurred the following year: a kung fu movie caused a sensation nationwide, making this ancient temple the focus of public attention overnight.

Shi Yongxin keenly seized this opportunity. Although he is not the founder of Kung Fu and his martial arts skills are not the most outstanding, he achieved a groundbreaking brand positioning: the impression of "Shaolin Temple equated with Chinese Kung Fu" is deeply engraved in the hearts of global audiences.

In the following decades, he systematically organized martial arts classics, promoted performances internationally, engaged in cultural dissemination, and created commercial licensing, transforming Shaolin from a religious site into a global "Kung Fu recognition" gateway. More importantly, this recognition was not limited to "cultural influence"; it ultimately translated into actual profits: ticket sales, intellectual property, real estate, and intangible asset management, among others. Recognition became the gateway to business.

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

The Deep Connection Between Collective Mindset and Web3 Projects

You might ask: What relevance does a monk who has managed a brand in the Shaolin Temple for forty years have for Web3 projects?

I mention Shi Yongxin not because he is proficient in live streaming or skilled in cultural IP operations, but because he has accomplished something that almost all Web3 projects strive for but rarely achieve: establishing the definition of a keyword in the minds of global users.

Web2 focuses on business, so naturally, market share is important, that is, the proportion and scale of your users in a vertical field. This is because traditional business, whether in valuation or the business itself, cannot be separated from the direct competitiveness in the market after the product is launched. However, for Web3 projects, I believe that the "collective mindset ownership" of the project far exceeds the "actual ownership rate".

But "focusing on group mentality" is not just empty talk; it runs through every stage of the project from 0 to 1, especially at the critical juncture of TGE. After TGE, liquidity is established, and the operational logic of the project will change completely. You are no longer just telling a story and attracting attention; instead, you begin to face real market pricing, arbitrage, and competition. This shift is very drastic, and if you are unprepared, the enthusiasm and expectations accumulated in the early stages may quickly dissipate in a short time.

Therefore, the project team must think in advance: what kind of user mindset should you seize before the TGE? How should you construct the narrative? How should you position yourself in the minds of users?

Next, we will discuss one by one.

How to Build a "Collective Mindset" Before TGE?

For most Web3 projects, the TGE is the first time they step onto the public market stage. However, what truly determines success or failure is the preparation before the TGE. This phase is a golden opportunity to capture users' minds. It not only affects whether the token can go live smoothly, but also whether you can use this "collective attention moment" to plant a long-term cognitive label in users' minds.

How you clearly define the project positioning, establish trust, and stabilize expectations during this period will determine whether you can attract truly valuable early participants. Otherwise, what awaits you may not be a takeoff, but an end.

I usually recommend that projects that have not yet had their TGE conduct a "mental three questions" self-check first:

1. What level do you belong to in the user's mind?

Are you a leader in this field or a fringe project? This actually corresponds to a real formula behind it:

User's hierarchical understanding of your project = 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 often reflect the users' subjective judgment of whether you are "worth betting on." This does not completely stem from your actions, but rather from which "tier you seem to be in."

What do users really remember about you?

This may be the area where Web3 entrepreneurs are most likely to overestimate themselves. Many teams present their projects with logical coherence and clear structure, but after listening for twenty minutes, I still find myself asking: "So what are your highlights?"

Reality is harsh. In this highly distracted market, countless projects promote themselves every day, and you shouldn't expect users to truly understand everything about you. They will only remember a few keywords that can evoke associations and stimulate emotions. Therefore, you must streamline your content and ultimately refine three things that users can "take away": easy to remember, capable of inspiring profit imagination, and related to future explosive potential.

Expressing in plain and understandable language is the most lacking ability in most projects.

3. Is the trust within the group stable?

How to build a project that earns user trust? This is the most easily overlooked point, and also the most easily broken layer.

Even if you have advanced technology and excellent storytelling, once users start to question your image, team, and behavioral patterns, trust will collapse, and the mindset will automatically detach.

The collapse of trust often does not stem from major events, but rather from the accumulation of seemingly trivial matters. For example, users ask questions without receiving responses, and repeated inquiries vanish into thin air; the distribution of promised rewards is repeatedly delayed, with no explanations given; when someone in the community raises doubts, the team collectively remains silent or coldly states "we will discuss internally"; sometimes, while the project description sounds impressive to outsiders, there are whispers behind the scenes that "this is just a round of arbitrage."

These things may seem insignificant when viewed individually, but it is precisely this feeling of "discrepancy between words and actions" that gradually erodes the initial trust of users, especially those early supporters. They are your most valuable asset, the ones who genuinely believe in your story, but once trust is broken, they are the first to leave and the least likely to return.

Just as the world mentions Chinese Kung Fu, most people's first reaction is not Wing Chun, Baji, or Tai Chi, but Shaolin. Wing Chun is not inferior, but it hasn’t encountered its Shiyongxin. You need to be the one who establishes a collective mindset for the project.

After TGE, the project officially enters the "financial asset" stage

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 it has value, whether it is worth purchasing, and whether it can appreciate, are now being validated in the most public and ruthless way.

The first change is in the user structure. Those early users who once accompanied you in discussing ideals, participated in the testnet, and were active in the community have also undergone a transformation in identity. They are now both users and traders. And a larger wave of traders is just now entering the scene. They are not here to "listen to your stories," but rather to ask a more direct question: "Does this coin have a profit opportunity?"

In Web3, there are very few "irreplaceable products." Even if you are 20% or 30% better than your competitors, as long as the coin price remains unchanged and the market remains stable, you will still be quickly abandoned. Users will not give you time and patience to grow; they will immediately switch to the project that "seems to have more upside potential."

Therefore, the project team must answer a straightforward question: Why should others buy your coin?

Behind this, there are actually three typical user mental models:

Beginner Player: My product is good. User: Whether it's good or not doesn't matter, I just don't dare to buy.

The most common mindset for such projects is: "We have leading technology, a great product experience, and a serious team." However, the market will not reward you just because you are working hard.

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

This is a typical "separation of product value and financial value." In Web3, without pricing elasticity, it is difficult to sustain user trust when there is only a product. You can be a builder, but in the eyes of users, you are just a "coin with no expected difference."

The reality is that product experience is no longer a scarce commodity; it is the price expectations that can capture attention that truly matter.

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 emotions.

Intermediate Player: I have good news, I will pump the price. User: I will speculate in the short term and run as soon as I make a profit.

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

They are neither believers nor community evangelists. But as long as you create "tradability", they will come in for a round.

This is not a bad thing. On the contrary, it shows that you have "activity". Users know that you are a project that can be traded in waves; even if it can't be held long-term, it is worth paying attention to.

As long as you can successfully pump the market a few times, it will start to assume that 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 → someone participating → someone squatting, this is the gradual process of establishing "price elasticity mindset" in Web3.

Advanced players: Make users feel that "this coin is worth holding, if they sell it, they won't be able to get on the train."

The most ideal, yet the hardest user mindset to establish, is when users actively choose to keep your coin when they clear their positions. What comes to their mind is not "Can I profit quickly?" 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 be capricious;
• Product progress is rhythmic, allowing users to see hope;
• The project party has good news, and the coin price is not weak;
• The coin price is resilient, capable of forming an emotional elasticity of "there's a story behind the rise, and a pullback can also happen."

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

SUI: A Real Case of Mental Reversal

Taking the currency $SUI, which I recently listed as a long-term target, as an example. Let's analyze it.

SUI has a luxurious team (the product research and development team from the former Facebook's Meta project), and its primary market valuation of several billion dollars has become the target of competition among major investment institutions. To be honest, I initially thought that SUI's performance during the early TGE was not ideal, and 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 while also focusing on community building. As for the secondary market, I won't elaborate much due to regulatory issues.

What happened next is known to everyone. Suddenly, SUI became the "Little SOL" in the market's mindset. It entered the list of assets that users are willing to hold for the long term.

In fact, Sui has already experienced two events this summer that tested market confidence: the first was a security incident involving an ecological project at the end of May, which resulted in approximately $223 million in liquidity pool being depleted; the second was the unlocking of 44 million tokens worth nearly $200 million in early July, 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 hottest projects in the sector.

Why can it withstand? The key lies not only in the Sui team's avoidance of negative situations such as hacker incidents, but also in their swift acceptance of responsibility. What is truly important is that over the past year, Sui has gradually changed the users' perception of it through actions, slowly transforming its image from one that was criticized as "arrogant and indifferent" to one that is "trustworthy and worthy of long-term investment."

Taking the attack on an ecological project as an example, although this risk was caused by a third-party smart contract, Sui is not directly responsible. However, the team did not shirk their responsibility; they not only immediately suspended the relevant contract and froze two involved wallets, but also collaborated with Sui validators to initiate a vote, and jointly arranged loans with the Sui Foundation to raise compensation funds to promise "full compensation" to the victims. In the end, 90.9% of validators voted in favor of releasing the $162 million frozen assets for compensation.