Content
@
0 reply
1 recast
1 reaction
w-g
@w-g
Nouniverse poll: Are you planning on LPing $nouns? At what starting price? Don’t all raise your hand at once. if a fork 3 occurs I am afaict the only possible meaningful seed liquidity for this thing continue to scratch my head over why my perspective on how to do it properly is not being more actively sought
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
w-g
@w-g
As designed, $nouns is mostly talk and little tech. disappointing because this could be really so revolutionary if done so that the full characteristics of noun ownership are inherited. This is possible! let’s not settle for an nft-x redeploy
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
seneca
@seneca
"mostly talk and little tech" - disappointing is you talking down on the efforts of others. there's so much that goes into doing any of this that goes unnoticed. re: gov: the spec clearly states that governance is something being considered by verbs for future versions hence upgradable contracts.
3 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
w-g
@w-g
What is being added beyond what is currently possible w nft-x ?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
seneca
@seneca
feature wise - nothing that im aware of (and i believe that's intentional). provenance wise, everything. comparing the project to nftx is like comparing a dao mint to anyone else minting the same exact media. provenance matters.
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
w-g
@w-g
may well be true. But little tech is also true then, fair? But provenance alone will not mean liquidity. & the central point is intention/effort will be wasted if there is no liquidity . I don’t enjoy being dao asshole or wev. I want us to do stunning transformative things that are structurally unassailable
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
seneca
@seneca
yes, little tech, sure. but "all talk little tech" would be taken as downplaying efforts by anyone. and this is no small feat (nothing is in a dao). i saw that was not your intention so we can close that.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
