In the fast-paced world of blockchain, where meme tokens often dominate the headlines with their wild volatility, Realms – the go-to platform for Solana DAOs – is pushing for a change. They just dropped a teaser thread on X announcing their brand-new podcast, "Would You Invest?" It's all about setting higher standards for projects and ditching the "casino trenches" that have defined much of the crypto space so far.

The thread, posted by @realmsdaos, features a compelling video clip where a speaker calls out the difference between genuine investments and those quick-hit, trending tokens that feel more like gambling. "Time to put an expectation of what a project, an effort looks like that is not another variation of the casino trenches we've had so far," the post reads. It's a clear signal that Realms wants to elevate the conversation around blockchain investments.

What is 'Would You Invest?' All About?

This weekly podcast goes live every Thursday at 10:00am UTC right on X via the @realmsdaos account. If you miss the live session, no worries – recordings are available on major platforms. Check out the latest episodes on YouTube, Spotify, or Apple Podcasts. Realms encourages everyone to follow and turn on notifications to stay in the loop.

The show aims to dissect blockchain projects, focusing on what makes them truly investable. It's presented by Realms, which supports over 3,000 Web3 organizations in the Solana ecosystem, helping them manage communities and treasuries effectively.

Highlights from the Pilot Episode

The inaugural episode, titled "Would you invest? ep 00," features a discussion between a Realms host and guest Dean Machine, the author of the Internet Capital Market (ICM) standard paper. For those new to the term, ICM is a proposed framework that treats token launches more like structured investments. It emphasizes clear rights for investors, on-chain safeguards, and transparency to avoid the pitfalls of unregulated speculation.

Key takeaways include a sharp critique of the current crypto fundraising landscape. Tools like pump.fun have made it too easy to launch tokens, often without proper governance or investor protections. The hosts point to examples like Parrot DAO, where the team controlled most tokens and redirected funds to themselves, leaving investors in the dark about their rights.

They dive into governance models, ranging from centralized setups (like councils) to fully decentralized ones (such as token voting or futarchy, which uses prediction markets for decisions). The emphasis is on "skin in the game" – ensuring participants have real stakes to promote accountable choices.

Treasury management gets a spotlight too. Instead of founders having unchecked access to funds, the podcast advocates for budgeted allowances, vesting schedules, and community veto powers. Investors should have exit options, like burning tokens for a pro-rata share of the treasury, even if it comes with a small penalty to discourage hasty dumps.

Looking ahead, the show plans to randomly select projects each week – think Raydium or Metaplex – and evaluate them against ICM criteria. This could highlight areas for improvement in tokenomics, investor safeguards, and overall sustainability.

Why Meme Token Fans Should Tune In

At Meme Insider, we're all about the fun and frenzy of meme tokens, but let's be real: not every launch is built to last. This podcast from Realms offers a fresh perspective on distinguishing hype from substance. By highlighting projects that prioritize transparency and real value, it could help blockchain enthusiasts – including meme traders – make smarter decisions and avoid the "hot potato" game of flipping volatile assets.

If you're in the Solana space or just curious about where DAOs (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations) are headed, "Would You Invest?" is worth adding to your playlist. It's a step toward maturing the ecosystem, making it more appealing for serious investors while still embracing innovation.

Catch the original thread here and join the conversation. What projects do you think deserve a deeper look?