Chainfeeds Summary:
Even with 100 million potential users, if there's nothing worth keeping, the place will eventually be deserted.
Article source:
https://foresightnews.pro/article/detail/96048
Article Author:
Thejaswini MA
Opinion:
Thejaswini MA: A few days ago, I read about a concept in Japanese philosophy: basho (場). Roughly translated as "place," but philosopher Kitaro Nishida imbued it with meaning far beyond a geographical location; it's more like a circumstance: a field within which all things can become themselves. In other words, people don't appear in a place by chance, but are shaped by the place they inhabit. Looking at Base from this perspective reveals a key problem: it constructs a location, but doesn't form a field. The data speaks for itself—active addresses have plummeted to an 18-month low; users have come, but haven't stayed. When Coinbase launched Base in 2023, the industry was filled with faith: believing it could solve Ethereum's long-standing user shortage. With its distribution capacity of 100 million users, Base was seen as a natural traffic gateway. In the short term, this narrative seemed to hold true—its growth rate outpaced all L2 tokens, its TVL once reached $5.6 billion, its fee revenue was among the highest in the industry, and it even confirmed its token issuance in 2025, further strengthening market expectations. But what followed was equally typical: users left after the incentive cycle, and on-chain activity quickly declined. Speculation-driven growth didn't lead to retention, but rather to temporary congestion. The so-called "venue" never truly formed. In 2025, Base bet on the creator economy, hoping to build on-chain culture and identity by default tokenizing content through the Zora protocol. But the results also confirmed that without a venue, there is no retention: more than 6.5 million content and creator tokens were issued throughout the year, but only 0.3% remained active, with the vast majority quickly forgotten. This essentially illustrates that incentive mechanisms can generate behavior, but cannot foster relationships. The "third place" that sociologist Ray Oldenburg described—bars, barbershops, and city squares—is what makes people repeatedly return, not because of efficiency or rewards, but because they provide an irreplaceable sense of presence and connection. The crypto world is the opposite; most products are designed from the outset to extract value, not to carry relationships. Users enter to take some benefit; they leave without paying any price. Without identity, irreplaceable capabilities, and a relationship network to maintain, stickiness naturally cannot be formed. Base's problems are not isolated, but a microcosm of the entire L2 model: the industry solved how to attract users, but mistakenly assumed that a sense of belonging would automatically arise. However, belonging is not a function; it requires time, culture, and long-term interaction to accumulate. What truly retains users is never higher incentives, but an irreplaceable experience and identity. Comparing Base and Arbitrum reveals two completely different user structures: the former's users are driven by trading, and churn occurs when trading decreases; the latter's user behavior is almost unrelated to transaction fees, indicating a deeper underlying motivation. Similarly, Hyperliquid's ability to build a stable community stems from its unique trading experience and sense of identity, making user retention a state in itself. This is the core of a "basho"—users and the system mutually shape each other, forming a relationship that cannot be easily migrated. Base's ultimate decision to return to trading applications is essentially a rational contraction, but it also signifies the failure of its attempt to build a social and identity narrative. The problem is that if even L2, with its strongest distribution capabilities, cannot create a basho for users to inhabit, then the entire L2 narrative—that blockchain can become the infrastructure of people's lives—is challenged. True success lies not in whether users have visited, but in whether they will return. A chain truly becomes a field when a visit transforms from arrival to return.
Content source 
