The first half came to mind with me, but there is a fundamental difference between me and the artist. Whether it is a content creator or a KOL, the essence should be to serve users, not to serve influence. Only better content can form influence based on the track. For example, @ KuiGas, a professor at Fengmi, has extensive research in the fields of cat raising and DeFi. However, if you ask him to explain Curve's business logic, it may not be suitable. For example, @ jasonn_chen998, a professor, focuses more on product and technology. He taught me all of my L2 knowledge, but it may be difficult for him to give a speech on US bonds. Also, @ BTW0205, an old Wu, has done well in arbitrage and DeFi. He is very stable in buying BTC at the bottom, but it is not easy for him to buy Meme. So the essence of Twitter should be content, and everything should be based on content to serve users, rather than influencing users through KOLs in turn. This is not right, especially when KOLs' coin offerings or "money" are related to relationships to force users to consume. Personally, I think it is the opposite. I think knowledge payment, fee based groups, and even single group marketing are normal, after all, they have put in a lot of effort. However, if the essence of content output is to earn users' money, it may not go very far. If it is really about making money, it should be taking users to earn market money, at least that's what I think.