Does JAM need its own token? 👀

Gavin Wood's logic is as follows 👇

1️⃣ Currently, there are no plans to issue a JAM token.

2️⃣ There is also not yet a strong enough reason to prove that Polkadot needs a new token.

3️⃣ However, this does not mean that it will never be issued in the future — it just means that so far, there has not been a truly convincing reason.

4️⃣ The real question to focus on is not 'Will there be a token?', but rather:

– How can we make Core truly useful?

– How can we break the stereotype that 'Polkadot = parachains', so that the capabilities of JAM are not overshadowed?

– How can we help developers realize that they can build something entirely new on JAM?

- If someone can propose a better development path in the future, things can certainly change. But for now, our task is to help more people understand what JAM is and what it can bring.

So the real question is not whether to issue a token, but how we can tell the story of JAM well enough for people to want to build on it? Instead of just thinking of 'parachains' whenever Polkadot is mentioned.

P.S. Changing people's perception of something is inherently a difficult task that takes time. If we were to radically release a new JAM token, it could potentially damage the credibility that Polkadot has built over the years. But if we simply rename DOT to JAM while keeping the name Polkadot unchanged, that also feels quite strange.

So what do you think?

However, I want to make it clear — the focus here is not on whether we should issue a token or change the name. The real question is: How can we help more people understand the importance of JAM!