The Blur buzz has continued in anticipation of the airdrop. Blur has also recently overtaken OpenSea, the industry leader, in terms of total transaction volume, accelerating its market share in NFT transactions. In addition to the stimulus of multiple rounds of airdrops, Blur is trying to target a small segment of speculative NFT traders by offering a frictionless, optional royalty, zero-transaction fee market, and accelerating zero-royalty competition.

In the face of competitive pressure from Blur's low price strategy, OpenSea, which had championed the support of artists and creators, had to bow and revise its royalty policy, announcing that it would limit creator royalties in its marketplace, Unless creators voluntarily prevent zero-royalty marketplaces (including Looksrare, X2Y2, and Sudoswap) from trading their collectibles in their smart contract code.

But Blur's surge in trading volume due to the "brush airdrop" has drawn criticism and questions about its unsustainability and market manipulation. Pacman, Blur's founder, responds that Blur's incentive mechanism is actually to introduce the concept of a market maker to the NFT space and to further push the NFT industry forward.

However, the above discussion focuses more on the financial attribute of NFT. KOL Aaron, a cryptocurrency, calls on the industry to be alert to the negative impact of Blur on NFT space. He believes that the artistic and cultural attribute of NFT should be greater than the financial attribute. It's more like a financial market.

The original translation is as follows:

Blur is the worst thing that has ever happened to this space. Here's why --

The NFT is not all about money. But Blur are emphasising it and making it their own. Blur brainwash you with incentives and hook you with airdrops.

Take a look at the graph below. Do you really want people to get into an NFT market that looks like this? Where is the art, project description, or other more detailed introduction?

Blur's incentives have recently been touted in comparison to OpenSea, which has fallen short. But if we put incentives aside and imagine ourselves as a white kid just entering the NFT space. Do you really want to be in a strong financial NFT market like Blur? Or do you want to get into places like OpenSea that also showcase the artistic or cultural attributes of NFT?

It is true that Blur has held on to certain audiences in the bear market. But does this market really benefit the entire NFT space in the long run? Let's think it through.

There are two types of people in the NFT space: 1) those interested in the potential of art, culture and technology and 2) those only interested in making a quick profit.

As for supporting creators, artists and those who are committed to creating better Spaces with this technology. OpenSea is probably the first marketplace that all of us use when we first get into this space. It has supported creators and artists from the beginning. Blur never did.

Just like a newborn baby, what do you want your child (NFT Little White) to use and embrace? Blur or OpenSea?

Whether it's the setup and look and feel on the UI, or Blur's airdrop to the user, it doesn't seem to have anything to do with NFT or the values we're supposed to promote -- money and greed < Art and culture.

So much for that. I don't hate Blur, nor am I a user. I just wish the NFT Space could cut its lens to what we used to be - about arts and culture (for example, the funny hoots of those monkeys in the Clubhouse, or even Lazy Lion's Twitter "raid"), but not what Blur is today.

Just hope the space goes in the right direction, not the money/greed side.