Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
ted (not lasso)
@ted
it is WILD to me that we only have allowlists for minting and NOT for secondary sales. that’s not how the trading of art, luxury goods, family heirlooms, homes, even surfboards works. most secondary marketplaces IRL have a curation layer to filter buyers. this is why NFT marketplaces lose volume to private txns :)
18 replies
5 recasts
56 reactions
Simon
@simongoldberg
Pretty sure opensea had this feature a while back where you could set allowlists for secondary. Might be wrong but swore there was something like this. But also I think this gets into a deeper conversation about truly “decentralized” NFTs/assets when/if this becomes a thing.
2 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
ted (not lasso)
@ted
why do NFTs/assets have to be decentralized? current secondary market for NFTs only allows the fastest and richest buyer to win. is that really a net positive? look at human history and the transfer of valuable assets over time. the sellers care who the buyer is. allowlists enable invaluable ongoing curation.
4 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
Simon
@simongoldberg
I’m not saying they have to be or don’t have to be. More of a conversation starter. If they aren’t and become too controlled from creator/company then what’s really the difference than owning an in game asset on Roblox or a song on iTunes.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Simon
@simongoldberg
Agree there would be some fun things to play around with re; secondary market and doing this. I’m all for experiments and could think of fun use cases. Re; transfer of v. Assets over time. I’d say it’s probably closer to an even split on caring who vs caring price. Would need to study more into this.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
