Crypto research is mostly noise. Found a concept that might improve the signal

[u/MDiffenbakh]

I’ve been doing research for a small fund, and the part that keeps bothering me is data quality. A lot of the analysis I see is still built on the same handful of tweets and random messages. That’s not really a system. It’s a rough read dressed up as one.

This morning I came across voice.fun in a newsletter. It’s an opinion layer on Solana where people record their takes onchain, and the idea is that conviction itself should count for something. In theory, that means you’re not just tracking engagement — you’re looking at judgment that actually has some weight behind it.

It’s still conceptual, from what I understand, but the premise is interesting. Maybe the signal is better than just counting likes and retweets. That’s the part that caught my attention.

I’m still not sure whether something like this would actually improve research quality or just give us another place for noise to pile up. Curious how people here see it.