Behavior Analysis of an Investor

During this period, I have mainly focused my energy on the Genesis Launches of the Virtual platform, so I will pay attention to various information, including the statements of many participants involved in the launch of this platform online.

Over the weekend, I saw a post from a user on Twitter (link in the "References" section below), and I think the issues raised are worth our reflection and examination.

I have extracted three statements from this post that I believe are noteworthy to share with everyone, as follows:

1. "Do the tokens launched through the Genesis release have real value?"

This participant raised many questions in this post, and this is one of the key questions. I feel that many of these questions can actually be observed and thought through to find answers on one's own.

When participating in a project, participants should certainly ask questions to the best of their ability, and ideally, the project team should also be able to answer these questions.

However, in many cases, for various reasons, it is difficult for the project team to satisfy the questioners. Some teams only partially answer questions, while others may not answer at all.

Some unconventional entrepreneurs sometimes ignore questions that seem "simple." Yet, such entrepreneurs can sometimes create miracles. It would be a pity if investors miss opportunities because they perceive the project as problematic due to the team's "dismissive" attitude.

I am not saying that the project should refuse to answer these questions, but rather that investors should be better prepared to seek answers themselves, rather than placing all their hopes on the team's responses.

Moreover, sometimes the project team's answers in specific situations may not truly reflect their inner thoughts. Some unscrupulous teams may deliberately conceal their true intentions in certain contexts. Therefore, even if the team answers a question, investors should not solely rely on that response to make decisions; they should still conduct in-depth investigations and research on their own.

Thus, from any perspective, investors should learn to find answers themselves, rather than just focusing on a specific response from the project team.

Where to look?

From the past statements, expressed views, and project white papers of the project team.

Regardless of whether the team deliberately conceals information in a certain context or provides a "dismissive" answer in a Q&A session, past experiences and historical records are difficult to fabricate or dismiss.

A team that engages in fraud will certainly reveal its true nature in past experiences and records; a team that appears "dismissive" will also express their genuine thoughts through their history and records.

Therefore, for investors, the ability to seek answers from the project's historical statements and expressions is crucial.

If one only waits for the project team to provide answers without proactively seeking clues, it will inevitably lead to significant pitfalls in the long run.

2. "Seven days later, the hackathon award-winning project from the virtual protocol, @solacelaunch, will launch. I believe this is one of the most anticipated projects among all those that meet the Genesis release criteria."

In my experience, projects that are highly anticipated beforehand may not perform well afterward.

This is not necessarily a problem with the project itself; it resembles a kind of "mystical" phenomenon.

Therefore, I tend to maintain a cautious attitude toward such projects. If I also like and have confidence in them, I will participate, but I won't have overly high expectations. If I am not interested or do not have confidence in them, even if they are "widely acclaimed," I will not participate.

For example, I did not participate in several popular projects recently launched on Genesis Launches, such as NAINCY, MANEKI, NYKO, and AXR: either I have little interest in these sectors, or I believe that the sectors these projects are in are already very crowded, and these projects do not show obvious characteristics.

3. "I have invested more than half of my assets into the purchase of $VIRTUAL and agent tokens."

I think this is the most critical point that this investor needs to pay attention to when participating in this project.

So far, in the AI + Crypto sector, Virtual is the project I recognize the most, but even so, its risks should not be underestimated.

Investing half of one's assets into such a risky project is somewhat akin to gambling.

Of course, if this investor believes they understand the project very well and can clearly see its development and potential over the next few years without any doubt, then making such a heavy investment is not out of the question.

However, it is evident that this investor does not understand the project that well; otherwise, they would not have so many questions awaiting responses from the project team, and the tone of their questions clearly reveals anxiety and unease. Additionally, this investor likely has not done much homework to research the project, as the answers to their questions are not difficult to find through their own research.

In fact, the best approach for investors in this situation is to refrain from investing anything. Because of the fear of missing out (FOMO), rushing into a project without much confidence and without being able to manage risks could lead to disaster.