jalil
@jalil
request for comments a hypothesis in protocol form https://mint.vv.xyz
2 replies
10 recasts
23 reactions
Steve
@sdv.eth
Pricing based on gas and incentivizing more mints to better comp artist is smart. Following the 24h meta of timed mints seems reasonable. I was adamantly opposed to timed mints because I disliked missing out and having to be constantly tapped in to mint but, maybe that's the point? Overall very nicely made. Strongly looking at it for some things I want to create.
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
jalil
@jalil
love to hear and thanks for the feedback!
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Steve
@sdv.eth
Just as I was doing a quick write up I did notice there’s *one* thing that would have been neat to include: refferer fees. It’s been a really fun experience being rewarded tiny fees of mints from zora and rodeo via @kiosk and I think it creates a nice circular economy for those involved.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
jalil
@jalil
fair feedback and will take back to discuss with Jack! we want to keep the core protocol as ungamified and simple as possible. digital artifacts that can be owned by N interested parties, creating networked objects with no dependencies outside of the network itself, and the creator. not saying referrer fees would detract from this per se, but it does add an(other) arbitrary decision to be made (as to the % cut for example). which just isn't something one really can ascribe a certain percentage to. there should be no reason to buy other than you wanting to be part of the emerging network of the artifact. referrer fees do add (the notion of) an ulterior motive to the interaction imho.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Steve
@sdv.eth
Oh for sure! NFT's/artifacts have largely been nothing but gamified, and consequently burnt many people playing the wrong games. I was initially dismissive of the referrer fees as I saw it as pennies and a cheap ploy to lure people in. But experiencing it was very different. Not because of the money that (very) slowly trickled in but seeing who was minting because of me. Often other artists that I held in high regard! It felt awesome feeling like my taste was recognized somehow, even if it was just luck of appearing on a feed. On the flip side, I'm stoked when I see a bunch of great art being minted by the same person (unsurprisingly it's usually @pravijn.eth or @mikegee) and they're getting their small kickback for their taste. Maybe the same gesture can be done without the money to avoid the gamification and keep the intentions pure as you said. Maybe it could just be a simple as including a referrer address in the calldata and doing nothing with it, but letting UI's decide to use it somehow. Or not!
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
jalil
@jalil
greatest of appreciation for those two (and the things they are working on) 🙏 i like the idea of somehow visualizing "where a collector came from". one important design decision (which in part is due to the fact that these mint frontends are supposed to be deployed by artists themselves) is that there will be no unified feed in the base UI componentns / apps we put out. by all means if someone wanted to build such a thing on this stack, they could certainly do that... but we won't ship a curative feed - and we'll rely on existing networks (e.g. X, farcaster, ...) for new work to be shared and surfaced.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Steve
@sdv.eth
Yup yup all this makes sense. I think my vision of *anyone* could make a unifying feed and show all artists using this tool falls apart as it takes resources to maintain such a feed, resources cost money, and money would have to come as a platform fee of sorts. Back to square one. Nothing stopping artists from adding that extra context of referrers via web2 databases or even modifying Mint.sol if they're truly passionate about it! I rescind my previous feedback; works great as is. 🤘
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction