Well you brought GDP as argument, which just doesn’t have anything to do with the price of an asset. If you sell a lot and buy a lot GDP grows, but the price of that asset can still be the same at the end.

Getting back to your initial argument:

Since anonymity is a feature, any transactions will increase its value due to it being “used” more

This is just plain wrong, as I could just make myself rich according to that logic… I still need to have that FIAT-money, need to exchange it (in which case I have driven the price up), but now I have less FIAT, so either I have more FIAT to further drive the price, or well I need to cash out in which case I’ll drive the price down. If I just send crypto from one (anonymous) account to another it just does… nothing to the price…

Huh? Not sure how crypto-markets and reactors are related to each other…

Former is “just” based demand and supply, which of course can still be quite chaotic, because well demand and supply is chaotic (due to all kinds of factors)…

But GDP is not the price of an asset, it’s a metric to measure the economic activity.

Is it really that hard to understand? The price is dictated by markets… Like with stock and other speculative assets. It’s a little bit wilder, possibly due to anonymity and wild promotion on various platforms (like youtube) etc. But in it’s essence it’s still a market…

No, because that would be an infinite money glitch, everyone would be rich… (that uses crypto).

It’s actually very simple basic market-economics, and independently of anonymity, you buy, you’ll drive the price up, you’ll sell, you’ll drive the price down. It’s slightly more complicated, because it involves makers (they set the price at which to sell or buy) and takers (which take the offer by the maker) and psychology (e.g. promotion on youtube to drive the price up) and obviously increasingly algorithms. But in general it’s still demand and supply, anonymity doesn’t have anything to do here apart from being more prone to scams. Take Monero as example one of the most anonym cryptos but still fairly stable (in crypto terms).

So to drive the price up, you either have to have some kind of good promotion (which at the end is just money from someone else), or a lot of money yourself.

This is not that uncommon in open source, but I’d think that something like this community project would be more decentralized, i.e. as a lot of people (especially technical people) use it, and see rough edges, that their motivation would be higher to contribute then.

Great, so I can just use any other dating app now, and don’t need Bumble anymore? What kind of genius move it is to kill the signature feature. But oh well the person responsible already left…

That ratio was much higher for me. I’d say about 70% sent a message. Probably work on the profile, make it more interesting? If that is now really gone I’m not sure whether I ever install that App anymore, it was nice not having to come up with first messages with questionable outcome…

That’s not how markets work…

I mean it’s a media platform, where you can interact socially - so social media?