0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
7 replies
1 recast
13 reactions
@v I know your response to me > 1 week ago was 100% accurate and truthful.
And to be completely fair, the fact that rewards are paid onchain provides tremendous accountability, transparency, and irreversibliity. That is truly powerful.
However, it is quite difficult to appropriately express the soft trust that gets eroded when users encounter "score freezing" and divergent leaderboards, and perhaps a sense of a chain being used only "sufficiently" as theater.
When we see different numbers reported concurrently from the same source of truth, it doesn't suggest fast iteration as much as sloppiness. Which an upfront onchain discipline would enforce, at a cost that we expect a crypto project to be willing to pay, as opposed to a tack-it-on-later-when-convenient ethos.
And coming from a crypto project, maybe it smells of sleight-of-hand, to those who have learned to approach these things with caution, from whom you have not yet had the chance to earn sufficient trust.
https://warpcast.com/v/0x3b9577b8 1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
