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
six
@six
This can be done at the token contract layer. I don’t think it makes sense at the marketplace layer because if I’m an owner and want to get around that to sell my token I’d just use a different marketplace
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
ted (not lasso)
@ted
and this is why most NFT communities have zero soul and have flopped or died out over the past 2.5 or 3 years. the friction layer is a feature, not a bug.
2 replies
0 recast
3 reactions
six
@six
right, my point is that it’s up to the token creator to define the rules of this friction, not the secondary marketplace. any transfer restrictions done in the secondary marketplace contract can be avoided so it needs to be in the token contract if you want the rules to be enforced
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
ted (not lasso)
@ted
agree it needs to be at contract layer. from this thread, i learned that highlight.xyz is doing it at the contract level (which i think is brilliant move) and excited to see how it works for them long term. im still pretty sure a form of allowlisting *can* be implemented at the marketplace, even if contract is better.
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
six
@six
oh yea it def can be done at marketplace, just not as resilient to ppl who want to avoid it unless you go w something like what @alok mentioned which is a combination of contract and marketplace
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
