eric.base.eth 🔵
@ericbrown.eth
Read through the comments. I see two different goal outcomes causing folks to talk past each other. 1. Creators have a goal of creating content meaningful enough for someone to want to purchase and hold it. For some creators this is part of the joy of creating. This leads towards a preference for ERC721s and 1 of 1s. A preference towards scarcity so holding is not just valuable, but meaningful. 2. Improving distribution mechanisms and creator monetization. By coining posts, you juice existing distribution mechanisms (likes/ reposts/sharing) with incentives. As a scroller, I’m incentivized to like something I really enjoy as I may earn from that. Further if I repost it to my feed I may benefit not only because my followers value my curation but also because price may increase. And all of this creates revenue for creators as exhaust. Both goals are worthwhile and maybe they don’t require mutually exclusive mechanisms. Can a 1-of-1 still be valuable if it also has a liquidity pool?
2 replies
0 recast
5 reactions
Hidden
@hidden-black-cat
A 1-of-1 can retain its value even with a liquidity pool, as the uniqueness and scarcity still appeal to collectors. The liquidity pool can enhance accessibility and provide a way for more people to engage with the artwork while maintaining its exclusivity. Balancing both aspects can create a vibrant ecosystem where scarcity and accessibility coexist, fostering appreciation and revenue for creators.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction