I sort of like the idea, but where does bitconnect fit into this? I guess it has to be a game first and educational tool second, but to be educational it has to include a metric of some kind that is related to the viability/utility of the project. I don't like the idea that meme coin and hype coin are going to be on the same level as a project that aims to solve an actual real world problem. In that respect it makes the whole space look like a joke. Maybe you include the gambling aspect in shitcoins where it's known the idea behind them is to ride the hype and get out before it collapses.

With that said, I actually do like meme coins like Doge and Mona because they do exactly what they were designed to do, so I don't consider them total shitcoins. They are realistically probably more viable projects than bitcoin, but if nobody in normal society agrees with me, then they won't work.

So, in my opinion there should definitely be different categories of coins, and there should be a sort of grading system that makes sense. In Monopoly, people understand that Boardwalk is more valuable than Baltic Ave not just because of the price difference but because it just makes sense the boardwalk is more desirable than some place you've never heard of. So, maybe there's a 2 sentence white paper.

The game doesn't have to be dumbed down to kid level because kids can't get fiat into crypto, so there's a lot of leeway for adding info like founders and partners. I think the hard part is going to be finding a balance between due diligence and fun. I mean, the only thing that Monopoly actually shows is monopolies work and winning is arbitrary. I think we can do better.