I’ve learned that the hardest part of crypto isn’t launching a protocol.
It’s making sure every participant still has a reason to care years later.
That thought kept coming back while I was reading about @BabylonLabs_io .

Most conversations stop at self-custodial BTC staking, but I found myself looking at incentives instead.

BTC holders can strengthen the network without giving up custody, yet the long-term direction of Babylon is shaped by BABY governance. It isn't automatically a problem,

but it does create two different groups with two different motivations. I've seen ecosystems stay healthy while those interests overlap, then struggle once they begin pulling in different directions.

That's usually when governance becomes more important than technology. The $BABY token may eventually reflect how well those incentives stay aligned, but that won't be obvious during periods of excitement. It will only become clear when participation slows and difficult decisions have to be made.

Maybe Babylon has already accounted for that. Maybe the real test hasn't arrived yet. Either way, that's where my attention is, because crypto rarely reveals its weaknesses when everything is working as planned.

@BabylonLabs_io $BABY #baby

What will matter most for Babylon's long-term success?