I’ve been around Nervos and CKB for a while, building, experimenting, and watching waves of projects come and go. I’m writing this because I care about this ecosystem and I want it to win!
From my perspective, we’ve seen some genuinely positive moves recently:
- The creation of CKBA (Common Knowledge Base Association), evolving the old foundation model into a Swiss membership‑based non‑profit to steward CKB long‑term and decentralize decision‑making and funding.
- The continuous community‑side push from Nervos Nation, led by people like Neon and Phil, who have been doing visible work for years: founding one of the main hubs for daily CKB discussion, creating explainer videos, and running projects like imagiNation and Blackbox.
- New grants and programs (e.g., Eco Fund’s Spark program, Community Fund DAO) backing hardware, Fiber‑based POS terminals, and other experiments that try to connect CKB to real‑world usage.
I want to explicitly say: thank you to everyone involved in launching CKBA and to Neon, Phil and the wider Nervos Nation crew for keeping the social and educational layer alive when it would have been easy to walk away. It genuinely feels like the pieces for proper stewardship and community coordination are finally being put in place.
That said, there’s an elephant in the room that I think we, as a community, should talk about more openly:
In my view, infra and governance are no longer our main bottlenecks. User incentives and public visibility are.
Right now we already have:
- A very flexible L1 (CKB‑VM), with serious research and engineering behind it.
- RGB++, Fiber, JoyID, .bit, DAO tooling, docs, and years of community content and education.
- DEX and NFT tooling and a long tail of experiments plus ongoing grants and funding programs.
And yet, from what I see, our user base is still tiny. Most people in crypto I talk to can’t name a single CKB app they actually use day‑to‑day. Even inside the ecosystem, a lot of “projects” are just tokens, tests, or abandoned experiments.
To me, a big part of the reason is that our builders default mindset is still something like:
- “I built a DEX, come trade.”
- “I built a wallet, come use it.”
- “I launched an NFT collection, come buy it.”
That might have worked on a hot chain in 2018. In 2026, in a multi‑chain world, with AI and modern tooling making it cheaper than ever to ship software, I don’t think “we built it, they will come” is enough anymore.
We’re in the agent/AI era where:
- Coding is faster and cheaper than it used to be.
- Small teams (or even individuals) can ship complex products.
- The scarce thing is not “can you deploy contracts?” but “can you design something people actually care about and keep coming back to?”
In that environment, the winners aren’t just “the best developers” in the narrow sense. The winners are the most creative teams:
- Creative in how they design products.
- Creative in how they design incentives.
- Creative in how they tell the story and make users feel like it’s worth their time.
Looking at CKB today, it feels to me like a lot of our energy is still infra‑centric and builder‑centric:
- CKBA is (correctly) focused on awareness, developer relations, and long‑term sustainability, but most concrete work I can see is still around internal coordination and dev support.
- Grants and programs often seem to evaluate technical merit and alignment with core infra more than they evaluate user acquisition, retention, and incentive design.
- The most consistent “public visibility” work I notice is coming from community initiatives like Nervos Nation and individual creators, rather than from a clearly articulated, ecosystem‑wide user incentive strategy.
None of this is a criticism of specific people or orgs. I see it as a shared blind spot that we’ve all inherited from focusing on tech first for years.
For an ecosystem to feel alive, I think it has to be a two‑way road.
It’s not enough to say:
“We have the best DEX / best wallet / best bridge / best NFT protocol.”
We also need to be able to say:
“If you show up and participate, there is something for you.”
Some examples of what “something for you” could look like:
- If you provide liquidity, you earn more than just raw trading fees, maybe points, NFTs, ve‑style voting power, boosts or status that carry across multiple CKB apps.
- If you trade, you accumulate some form of reputation or XP that actually unlocks new experiences over time instead of being forgotten after every transaction.
- If you mint, build, create content, or onboard others, you’re recognized and rewarded in ways that compound (not just a one‑time airdrop nobody remembers).
- If you stick around, your relationship with the ecosystem deepens instead of resetting to zero.
I’m not saying we should copy every degenerate incentive scheme from other chains or spin up endless ponzis. That’s not what I want for CKB.
What I’m trying to say is:
As long as you participate in the ecosystem, there should always be some kind of feedback loop that gives you value back.
That value can be financial, social, reputational, educational, or purely experiential, but I believe it has to exist. Without that, we’re basically just yelling “use my product” into the void, and on a smaller chain that’s a fast path to silence.
So here’s my ask to three groups, including myself:
1. Builders (myself included)
When we design something on CKB, I think we need to go beyond “it works” and “the tech is cool.”
Questions I’m starting to ask myself more deliberately:
- Why would a random user from outside our bubble care about this?
- What do they get today if they try it for the first time?
- What do they get next month if they keep using it?
- How does this plug into other CKB apps so the value compounds, instead of being another isolated island?
Technology is necessary, but in my view creativity and incentive design are now just as important as the code.
2. CKBA, grant programs, and big ecosystem players
When proposals and initiatives are being evaluated, I hope we can add a few more questions to the list:
- Is there a plan to attract and retain users?
- How does this project reward participation (beyond hoping “number go up” someday)?
- How does this project make other CKB apps stronger, instead of competing in a vacuum?
- Can we coordinate incentives across multiple projects so users feel like they are in one ecosystem, not 20 disconnected experiments?
We’ve already shown we can fund infrastructure and documentation, CKBA, CKBoost, Eco Fund, Spark, Community Fund DAO, etc. prove that capital can move when we want it to. My hope is that we start funding user‑level experiments in incentives and growth with the same seriousness.
3. The community
I’d love to see us, as a community, hold ourselves to a higher bar than “cool tech, nice repo, nice logo.”
When a new project launches, I think it’s fair, and healthy to ask:
- How do users benefit if they commit time, liquidity, or reputation here?
- Is there a clear story for why someone should choose this over everything else they could be doing in crypto?
- Does this project contribute to a shared CKB “economy of participation,” or is it another isolated island?
Nervos Nation has already shown what consistent, visible community work can look like: videos, spaces, content, discussion, and concrete projects like Blackbox that try to bring CKB into real‑world merchant flows. For me, that’s a great example of the kind of creativity and persistence we need more of, on both the social side and the incentive design side.
If we want more people to show up, I don’t think links and diagrams alone will cut it anymore.
From where I stand, infra‑wise CKB is in a strong place. CKBA gives us a more mature governance and coordination layer. Nervos Nation and other community efforts keep the social layer alive. The pieces are there.
The real question for the next chapter, in my opinion, is:
Will we stay an infra‑heavy, low‑visibility chain with a small, loyal core…
or will we become a place where people show up because there is something for them, and they can actually feel it?
I’ve choosen to stay and build. I just want us to be honest with each other and with ourselves about why we don’t have more users yet, and what it will actually take to change that.
I’d really like to hear concrete ideas from others:
- What kinds of user rewards and incentive models do you think fit Nervos’ philosophy?
- How can CKBA and the grant programs gently nudge teams toward more creative, user‑centric designs without being heavy‑handed?
- How can we coordinate ecosystem‑wide incentives instead of 100 isolated point systems?
My hope is that, if we get the incentives and creativity side right, the tech and governance structures we already have will finally get the spotlight they deserve.
我在 Nervos 和 CKB 这条路上待了很久，一直在这里搭建、试验，也亲眼见过一批又一批项目来来去去。写下这些，是因为我真心关心这个生态，我希望它赢！
在我看来，最近我们确实有一些非常积极的进展：
- CKBA（Common Knowledge Base Association，共识知识库协会） 的成立，把之前的基金会模式升级为瑞士注册的会员制非营利组织，用来在更长时间维度上负责 CKB 的治理与发展，并逐步去中心化决策与资金分配。
- 社区侧 Nervos Nation 的持续推动，由 Neon 和 Phil 等人带头，他们已经默默做了多年的可见工作：搭建了日常 CKB 讨论的重要社区据点，制作讲解视频，运行 imagiNation、Blackbox 等项目。
- 新的一批资助与计划（例如 Eco Fund 的 Spark 计划、Community Fund DAO），在支持硬件、基于 Fiber 的 POS 终端，以及其他试图把 CKB 和现实世界使用场景连接起来的实验。
我想非常明确地说一句：谢谢 所有参与推动 CKBA 的人，也谢谢 Neon、Phil 和更广泛的 Nervos Nation 团队——在很多人本可以选择离开的时候，一直撑着这个生态的社交层和教育层。现在真的能感觉到：让 CKB 进入“真正有治理、有协作”的新阶段的那些拼图，正在被一点一点拼好。
但与此同时，我觉得有一头“房间里的大象”，我们作为社区可能需要更坦诚地聊一聊：
在我看来，基础设施和治理已经不再是我们最大的瓶颈了，真正的瓶颈在于：用户激励和公共可见度。
现在，我们 已经 拥有：
- 一个非常灵活的 L1（CKB‑VM），背后有扎实的研究与工程。
- RGB++、Fiber、JoyID、.bit、DAO 工具、文档，以及多年来社区生产的大量内容与教程。
- DEX、NFT 工具，以及一长串持续在拿资助、做尝试的各类项目。
但就我看到的现实来说，我们的用户规模依然很小。我和很多圈内朋友聊起 CKB 时，大多数人说不出一个自己每天真正在用的 CKB 应用。甚至在 CKB 自己的生态里，很多所谓“项目”其实只是代币、测试品，或者已经被放弃的半成品。
在我眼里，很大一部分原因是：我们开发者的默认心态，很多时候还是这样：
- “我做了一个 DEX，来这里交易吧。”
- “我做了一个钱包，来用我的钱包吧。”
- “我发了一个 NFT 系列，来买我的 NFT 吧。”
这套叙事，可能在 2018 年某条热门公链上还能凑合用。但到了 2026 年，在一个多链共存的世界里，再加上 AI 和各种现代开发工具把“做出一个产品”的成本降到了前所未有的低，我真的不觉得 “只要我们做出来，用户自然会来” 还能继续成立。
我们已经进入了代理 / AI 时代，在这个时代里：
- 写代码比过去更快、更便宜。
- 小团队甚至个人就能交付复杂产品。
- 真正稀缺的，不再是“你能不能部署合约？”，而是“你能不能设计出一个让人真正在乎、并且愿意持续回来的东西？”。
在这样的环境里，赢家已经不再只是狭义上的“最强开发者团队”。真正的赢家，是那些最有创造力的团队：
- 在产品设计上有创造力。
- 在激励机制设计上有创造力。
- 在讲故事、塑造体验、让用户觉得“值得花时间”的方式上有创造力。
回头看今天的 CKB，就我的感受而言，我们的大量精力仍然高度偏向 基础设施 和 开发者视角：
- CKBA 很正确地把重点放在认知传播、开发者关系以及长期可持续性上，但我目前看到的大部分具体工作，还是围绕内部协调和开发者支持展开。
- 许多资助和计划，看起来更多是在评估技术价值、与核心基础设施的契合度，而不是在认真评估“如何获取与留住用户”“如何设计激励闭环”。
- 我看到的最持续的“公共可见度”工作，其实更多来自 Nervos Nation 等社区自发项目和个人创作者，而不是一套清晰的、整个生态一起执行的用户激励与增长策略。
这些都不是在指责任何具体的人或组织。我更把它看成是：我们整个生态共同的盲区——这是多年“技术优先”自然积累出的路径依赖。
对于一个生态来说，如果想让人感觉“它是活的”，我觉得它必须是一条双向的路。
单单说一句：
“我们有最好的 DEX / 钱包 / 跨链桥 / NFT 协议。”
是远远不够的。
我们还需要能够理直气壮地说：
“只要你愿意来、愿意参与，这里就一定有属于你的东西。”
“属于你的东西”可以是什么？举几个我脑子里想到的例子：
- 如果你提供流动性，你得到的不应该只有简单的交易手续费，可能还有积分、NFT、ve 风格的投票权、加成或身份标识，而且可以在多个 CKB 应用之间延续和叠加。
- 如果你经常交易，你应该可以积累某种形式的声誉值或经验值，这些东西能逐渐解锁新的体验，而不是每笔交易都被当成“独立事件”被遗忘。
- 如果你参与铸造、搭建、创作内容，或帮助新人进入生态，你能得到被持续看见、持续奖励的机制，而不是一笔谁也记不住的一次性空投。
- 如果你一直留下来，你和这个生态之间的关系应该会变得越来越深，而不是每一次都像“重新开始”。
我并不是说，我们应该去照搬其他链上那些已经跑偏的激励模式，或者开启无止境的旁氏式印钞，这不是我想要的 CKB 未来。
我真正想表达的是一句话：
只要你还在参与这个生态，就应该永远存在某种“反馈回路”，持续把价值回馈给你。
这种价值，可以是经济上的，也可以是社交上的、声誉上的、教育上的，甚至纯粹是体验上的。但是，我相信这种反馈必须存在。否则，我们就只是不断在对外喊着“来用我的产品”，而在一条规模还不大的链上，这其实是通往“被忽略”和“被遗忘”的最快路径。
所以，接下来是我想对三个群体（包括我自己）提出的一些期望：
1. 建设者（包括我自己）
当我们在 CKB 上设计某个东西时，我觉得需要刻意跨过“它能跑”“技术很酷”这两道门槛，再往前多走几步。
我现在会更刻意地问自己这些问题：
- 对一个完全在我们圈子之外的用户来说，他为什么要在乎这个东西？
- 如果他今天第一次来用，他当场可以得到什么？
- 如果他下个月还在用，他会比今天多了一些什么？
- 这个东西怎么和其他 CKB 应用产生联动，让价值在生态内不断叠加，而不是又多出一个孤岛？
技术是必要条件，但在我看来，现在 创造力和激励设计 已经和代码本身一样重要。
2. CKBA、各类资助计划，以及生态中的“大节点”
当我们在评审提案、规划新计划的时候，我真心希望我们可以在原有问题之外，再多问几句：
- 这个项目有没有一个清晰的方案，去获取并留住用户？
- 它是如何奖励参与者的？除了寄希望于“哪天币价涨起来”之外，还有没有可见的、可持续的设计？
- 这个项目能让其他 CKB 应用变得更强吗？还是又是一个完全在真空里竞争的小世界？
- 有没有可能把多个项目的激励协调起来，让用户感觉自己是在参与一个生态，而不是 20 个互不相干的小实验？
我们已经证明自己可以为基础设施和文档买单——CKBA、CKBoost、Eco Fund、Spark、Community Fund DAO 等等都已经说明，只要想做，资金是可以动起来的。
我个人的期待是：接下来我们也能用同样的认真程度，去支持那些针对用户层的激励与增长实验。
3. 社区
我很希望，我们这个社区能把自己的标准提高一点，不再满足于“技术很酷、仓库很好看、Logo 很帅”就完事了。
当一个新项目上线时，我觉得有几个问题是完全合理、而且健康的：
- 如果用户愿意在这里投入时间、流动性或声誉，他们究竟能得到什么？
- 有没有一个清楚的故事，能让一个普通用户觉得：“在一堆可以选择的事情里，我为什么要选你这个？”
- 这个项目有没有在构建一个共享的 CKB “参与经济”，还是又多了一个自成一体的小岛？
Nervos Nation 已经给过我们一个很好的示范：持续输出的视频、Space、内容、讨论，以及像 Blackbox 这样试图把 CKB 带进现实世界商户收款场景的具体项目。 对我来说，这正是那种我们需要更多出现的“创造力 + 坚持”：既体现在社交和内容上，也体现到激励与产品设计上。
如果我们真心想让更多人走进来，我不觉得仅靠几个链接和几张架构图就够了。
在我看来，就基础设施层面而言，CKB 现在处于一个相当不错的位置。CKBA 带来了更成熟的治理与协作框架，Nervos Nation 等社区努力也一直在维系生态的社交层。拼图已经放在桌面上了。
接下来这一章，真正的问题可能是：
我们会不会一直停留在一条“基础设施很强，但外界存在感很低，只有一小撮忠实用户”的链上，
还是会成为一个地方：人们愿意走进来，因为这里确实有属于他们的东西，而且他们能真切感受到？
我选择留下来，继续在这里搭建。我只是希望，我们能对彼此、也对自己更诚实一点：为什么到现在我们的用户还不多？要想改变这一点，究竟需要动哪些地方？
我也非常想听听大家更具体的想法：
- 在你看来，什么样的用户奖励和激励模型，才真正符合 Nervos 的理念？
- CKBA 和各种资助计划，可以通过什么比较“温和”的方式，引导团队更多考虑用户与激励，而不是只盯着技术栈？
- 有没有什么办法，可以让我们设计出“整个生态共享的激励机制”，而不是 100 套互不相干的积分系统？
我自己的愿望是：如果我们能把激励和创造力这一块做好，那么 CKB 已经具备的技术和治理基础，终究会得到它应得的聚光灯。