Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
EulerLagrangodamus
@eulerlagrange.eth
Kinda feel like using a different name for the app and protocol was a mistake. Non-crypto natives gonna be confused
9 replies
0 recast
11 reactions
Jess Sloss !!!
@jess
really? I think it was essential. Beyond making fully understanding the ecosystem a bit more complicated, whats the risk you see?
2 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
Cassie
@cndx
I agree, it is essential It's just people still get protocols confused as the dApp or product itself in my experience
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
EulerLagrangodamus
@eulerlagrange.eth
My POV is you want to optimize for the 90% not 10%. You can explain to the web3 crowd thereโs a separation between protocol and client. Maybe a foundation leases the trademark to the client or something. Overall this would end up with less confusion, might be skewed for the first users though ๐
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction