As suggested by Kevin, who is my classmate and also hold opposite opinions to the Crypto art, I’m going to hold a conversation that happens between two stakeholders who have opposite attitudes toward each other.
I understand that stakeholders would only swap their attitudes if they were supposed to. People think from different positions, some were born to embrace the novelty, some of them are not, sometimes it may take some time for them. I frequently feel I did not do much, might be a compass, who lead people, but never be the one who makes people move, they move by themselves.
In this case, by accumulating people who hold opposite attitudes through the project, I planned in-person debates between stakeholders to provoke widespread criticism. There is an artist in each contest who is involved in the NFT, and the oppositions are not.
Preparation
Format
Inspired by the Variety show Actors on Actors, conversations could happen well and be more chilled without hosts. Let them fight each other.
They happen in the meeting room, dining space and street, which proved the re-examination could happen everywhere. Instead of talking with me as an expert in this field, generate more sparks the same position.
Question for the speakers
- attitudes towards crypto art
- The relationship between metaverse and crypto art
- What are the implications among Chinese policy that banned NFT in China
Reflective writing:
I think these conversations had better implications than educating them. They might assume that I totally agreed and like the idea of NFT, which in fact I’m not. The monetary arguments for Crypto art are true for me, however, it still provides a space for the new generation. I used to admire the people who live in the 2000s, there’s more chance than today, everything left today were succussed before. We got no chance. However, NFT is a new era for us.
People think with their own methodologies, it was hard to change them, but it is vital to provide a chance to make them think more.