A New Way of Approaching Community Projects?

What I am getting from your argument is that u want Community projects to be more available, but this only depends on project leader and the members. Each group can decide if they want it to be limited for wider public.

Now imagine that u have spent a lot of time, like months drafting the document and submitting to Captain, u hold this project/nft close to ur heart without it even being made yet.

U start feeling the magic as Captain works on the project. U decide to make it a public release.

U can bet people will bulk buy copies in order to resell and make profit on your and Captain`s efforts. Now lets add to that u use ur hard earned money and big percentage of it in each copy u get for urself, so u have to be carefull with money until next payment is due.

Now while u are going through all that, someone is selling ur copies and turning profit.

U can look at this from a higher perspective and be like: Let them do what they want, many of them will buy the NFT because they will desire it for personal use. This is true thank God.

In the end, I think that after u read all this, u will be able to realize why it isnt fair to ask groups to make their projects commercially available.


Man ok. I actually meant well.
Oh well, back to work for me now. Putting in those hours so I can buy shielding 3.0 in a bit lol


Some of you need to read the post to the end, I simply asked project leaders to simply CONSIDER it. I know it won’t be feasible for every project but some it would hence the discussion.

There aren’t many ‘new’ concepts being released most are a slightly different variations to achieve the same thing.

Should we have to ask the Captain to do it over and over again for every 10 or so people who couldn’t join a project? My idea was to reduce that repetition.

A lot of people want to be involved and contribute but unless you practically live on the forum then when a a project is proposed it is quickly closed off. The solution proposed here seems to be is every single person to create a ‘similar but different’ project. Have I got that right?

Whoever “said greed helps society moves forward”, I’m not sure the Captain and Sammy had greed as the quality to grow this community on. To play devils advocate this greed is probably largely responsible for the insane amount of field piracy. Also consider the nature of NFTs outside of fields and what its purpose is, it would be naive to think that mentality has not seeped in here. The nature and focus of the forum has significantly shifted since the introduction of NFTs.

Whoever spoke about fresh/new ideas or “borrowing and/or absorbing” from other projects, most NFTs are an amalgamation of previous fields plus research done by others in different areas of study. Nothing has been completely original. If a project is limited to 10 how could it not be repeated if someone wants to achieve the same/similar goal.

To those justifying exorbitant sell on prices, did the Captain charge you anything like that? Did you put more work and effort into it than him to charge 10-100s of times more than he did for it? There is nothing wrong with making a profit on an NFT but we all know what the huge mark ups are about.

A few of you have proved yourself incapable of a civilized discussion but the rest I commend you for stating your opposing views in a polite and well reasoned manner. When I have another chance I will respond to the genuine responses.


To me, the NFTs should be a creative endeavor where people are enthusiastic about the ideas they are working with and will be happy to share those ideas (and resultant fields) with anyone else that shares their enthusiasm and outlook.

Maybe a change of format would be better? Instead of having projects completely behind the scenes, we could have a sort of unveiling that is done before the mint number is established. And, once that is done, we could have a posting area where the ideas are displayed and then people can sign up to get an NFT copy at the original price.

That way, each group would have ownership of their NFT ideas (and the overall shape of the project) but not restrictive ownership of the NFTs. This would put the focus on making the best ideas possible for general purpose things or by getting something perfect for a small cross-section of the forum. --But, most importantly, it would take the scarcity out of the equation. If people see something they like, they could jump for it without having a huge financial hit.


I don’t think this is true at all.
For example, let’s say there were 2,200 copies of Astral Walkie Talkie. That’s enough for everyone on this forum to own at least one.

Will people really buy in bulk trying to resell and make a profit when there are so many copies? To do that, they would need A LOT of money.

Take Solidifier as an NFT (I know it’s not a community project, but it’s one of the best selling NFTs with at least 1000 copies). No one is buying in bulk and reselling it for profit precisely because there are so many copies available, and others people can get one for themselves at the original price instead of the mark up.

Now, if the Solidifier was minted at just 50 copies… I believe it will be a whole different story.


I wonder if that’s really the case? Or if that only matters when when we have limited runs?

Because we have plenty of public NFTs (even some that are lower-price, unique and have been out for quite a while) that didn’t instantly disappear and are even still available. (The Corpus Spiritus Tarot Deck is only one such NFT that comes to my mind.)


I get that people want their project ideas to be valued at a higher price when they resell their copies. But to mark up to close to thousands of dollars and limited amount is something else.

And if the argument was that people in our society been selling devices or healing modalities that’s less effective for much much more… then we’ve gotta ask ourselves…are we making another version of that same kind of society? To some degrees that kind of society has let me down many-many times in perspectives.

My thing is, I went with a open mind to switch to sapien medicine as my main source (not alternative) solution to my issues and those dear to my heart. But at the same time I also want more people to have access to try and see for themselves the wonders Captain has made available.

With that said, I urge people to use their hearts in deciding whatever they want to do with Captain’s creation. Heart Intelligence surpass our Ego driven intellect, and hope we can make this community be more of that moving forward.


Why this nft project always end up in a fight lol



Just an idea, what if we as a forum community come up with some different new ideas for how the group creation NFTs could work and then we could have votes on the forum for the different ideas, and so everyone on the forum could be heard by their vote (like a really small democratic country :slight_smile: ).

One idea for example could be that the minimum limit of copies for a group creation, which is now 10, is raised to for example 30, which would be better financially for Captain and there would be more copies available and a better chance for more people to join each group.


Why not have an option to re-mint if 10 or more people (not in the original group) want a copy and feel like they missed out on something?

—That’s just an idea. It’s just that scarcity (when not tempered in some way) tends to bring out predatory qualities in people. This would be one way of tempering scarcity and its correlates.

–Not only would that limit some level of FOMO, it might decrease the extent to which FOMO is exploited in the market


I confess I’ve only skimmed this and the other discussions about NFTs. The scarcity question seems to be a recurring sticking point.

Again, I’m a bit out of my depth but one part of the sticking point might be that there could be incremental, upfront, production costs for each NFT minted that are different from the classic audios (which can be copied, essentially, “for free”) and these costs (if they are a factor) are not fully understood or considered by the forum friends who are wanting larger production runs to be available. These friends might not understand the dynamics of investing capital into inventory or the ongoing carrying costs of any inventory waiting to be sold.

If this is a factor, then a simple bit of education could be a remedy to this part.

Another part of this sticking point seems to me a matter of–shall we say–compensation for the creativity and administration that goes into the creation of these projects. (And let me be clear: I am ALL for people–including Team Dream–being compensated for their work.) To date, the only avenue for that compensation has been the resale market.

Since the production runs have tended to be finite and “one and done,” the only way to maximize the compensation has been to maximize the resale market, including creating a scarcity value (through tiny mintings and–dare I say it?–possibly fanning the coals of FOMO that burn for many of our forum friends.–Interrupting this post to make a post in the Requests and Fields thread; brb!..I’m back. Didja miss me?)

With this part of the sticking point, there are ways (other than a hot resale market) to provide that compensation (to both Team Dream and the project leaders). One such example might be a royalty arrangement to the project leaders for each of their NFTs that Sapien sells, like Sapien sells NFTs on Soundwave.

Or maybe a marketplace (similar to the existing ES Marketplace) could be created on Soundwave (I’m picking on Soundwave because the NFT capability there is already activated), where the project leaders run their own “shops” within that marketplace paying royalties (like a “rent”) to Team Dream.

My examples, of course, don’t factor in the various business structure complexities that seem to be present behind the business of SapienMed. But that’s not my point.

My point is with a very little bit of creativity (something that’s in abundance here on this forum) we could fairly compensate the creators without relying on a red-hot resale market (which will eventually cool at some point).


To be fair, I’m out of my depth too.

If the NFT project I have gets made, that’ll be the first and (probably) last that I do. I’ve picked up other NFTs at a premium, but this one is a personal design that would do everything I would think to want but don’t have an NFT for.

I don’t like the profiteering side of things**, though. So if I get a confirmation that it will get made, I’ll probably put more information about it in the open so that anyone with an interest could get a copy at the original low price.

In principle, it could be one of the most powerful NFTs for getting psychic powers. But it’s a catch-22. Being able to develop said powers will depend on a high level of empathy from the start or allowing empathy to be strongly built by the NFT—it’s a bit of a specialty project by empaths, for empaths who are interested in going further; I imagine the appeal will be limited :rofl:

**by this, I was meaning high re-sale prices after NFTs are released. But my threshold for using the term is pretty low (i.e. anything significantly greater than Dream’s pricing)


I understand.

To be fair, the profiteering hasn’t been and isn’t limited to community projects. As far as I can tell, the profiteering has existed long before I joined this forum. It seems to me (I hope) that the large part of the profiteering has been driven by the pirates who continue to plague Sapien and over whom Sapien has limited influence. Sure, some of our forum friends have decided to get in on that gravy train, too, and that gives a more succulent pie for the pirates.

If we can shift that compensation piece away from a resale market, there’s a possibility that we can create a solution that satisfactorily compensates the creators (including Team Dream) while only leaving crumbs of the pie for the pirates.


:point_up: Important!


That could possibly where re-minting comes into play, maybe by batches of 10/20/50/100 depending on how popular a NFT is.
Maybe each batch could be a different colour variant like what Dream just recently did with the 9 Financial Points.

So First Edition mintings are for group members and will have their own special rarity like a collectible. So still keeping lil bit of that spicy NFT game value.


I reckon there have been proposed NFT projects that’s original aim was for this very reason . So you know, instead of selling it exclusively, just publicly.
True, the ones suggested/submitted were deity oriented, so they aren’t Divine Gong or Astral Walkie Talkie like, but still, it’s a start?

Poseidon could be another :woman_shrugging:t2:
(Persephone, Isis, Osiris, Aphrodite, Parvathi were submitted)

But its interesting. Because sometimes when it’s announced for public sale the desire to obtain said nft diminishes, drastically.
Why, idk but it’s deff a thing.
For persephone I think only 4 people reached out lol
We weren’t that stupid to know that it would have been such a higher bandwagon had we said something like “10 members. 2 copies each, only”.

So the exclusivity is what fuels the nft desire design.
Which is why I dont think it works, unfortunately

I cannot believe im about to say this bc i sound like a freaking dwight but

I dont think forcing the whole do the 20/60/100 release is a good idea.
I cant help but think it’s like forcing the implementation of a Marxist economy on a currently happy go lucky Capitalist one

The idea is freedom of choice.
By some of us actually wanting “hey lets make this all equal”
You take away that important characteristic capitalism holds; exclusivity. And fundamentally, NFTs only work because of that; it’s really just another capitalist school of thought just clothed in fancy digital terms.
If you take that away, well then perhaps you are taking away the customer, too.


Unfortunately true :sweat_smile:


I think everyone should just re-read what our guy said back at the major blueprint thread.

I think if some of y’all see it from that perspective, it might help

Just focus on this part:

Remember, you are disliking the fact that something that you were not aware of, and never existed was made and now offered for a limited sale

^I mean yeh.
Idk. Dont throw rocks at me. But yeah lol

I think we just need to change the outlook. It’s really cool. You can always save up to eventually get it or better yet make another. It won’t be the same! It can be similar sure but rest assured everyone can still get a lovely piece of cake :slight_smile:
When there’s a will, there’s a way


I think the the why here is the crucial part. Personally I believe this is partly due to people not buying in order to sell.

Also, more often than not the desire to obtain doesn’t diminish. Look at Black Panther and Tuaoi Crystal for example (both semi-open projects). They both sold out in a day. Look at point of no return. Look at solidifier. Heck look at BOL, Plasma Flaunt and all the other non-NFT releases.

If people are interested in the product, and not the potential future monetary value, they will buy it.

1 Like

Now Chessie this is important to realize.

People- many people are interested in NFTs. Part of the appeal is the rarity; part in its unique design.

And i am not even speaking on the whole schpeel on reselling right now. Thats just like pixie dust to all this. I mean even if one couldn’t resell not every one of the 400 members can fit into the 20 NFT slots

You see its about understanding
In life we cant always get what we want

We offered a few possibilities and that in itself is pretty cool
There were only supposed to be like 12 NFTs anyways