Content
@
https://opensea.io/collection/nouns
0 reply
1 recast
1 reaction
Wilson Cusack
@wilsoncusack
Maybe Nouns *should* have an L2? To the degree that L2s these days are a lot about competing for "unique state" and attention, this seems to play well to Nouns? I guess only concern is that it's tough for us to fully commit to it, and maybe it becomes a ghost chain...
7 replies
1 recast
9 reactions
martin ↑
@martin
Yeah an L2 feels like it has a fairly high upfront dev cost and hard to gauge what would happen on it ahead of time. What if we just fully committed to an L2 like Base or Zora?
1 reply
0 recast
4 reactions
rafa
@rafa
I think building an L2 would just increase friction to use (bridging) It feels more like for Nouns to proliferate you should deploy on all the chains then double down where there’s more activity and growth opportunity
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
gami.eth
@gami.eth
What if we had an OP rollup with a unique enough nounish config that it could find natural market demand beyond our own usage?
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Lulu
@nekofar.eth
Everyone can create a fork chain and call it L2. But how decentralized are most of these chains? 🤔
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
martin ↑
@martin
https://x.com/willnuelle/status/1728982827159679369?s=46 saw this thread this morning and felt really excited about this maybe the most effective way for Nouns to capture revenue from its onchain fans is by selling block space
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Nounish Prof ⌐◧-◧🎩
@nounishprof
Wouldn’t it make more sense to support existing public goods like OP stack? If we build on OP (or Base or Zora) there’s opportunity for interoperability and shared learning.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
