I’m all for the technical audit necessary not to break the bridge but I think the approval should solely based on this in order to keep the gates open for builders without us, the OG community, enforcing ideological biases. It would keep the economy and the network agile while letting the market (I know you guys love that) decide about value and liquidity.
Agreed, but I don’t think the bridge solution permits that at this time.
In the future, I believe organizations wishing to migrate their tokens to NoM will submit a proposal to the governance contract. Successful proposals will automatically trigger bridge function calls to provision those tokens.
Once we have USDT and others it’s time for me to share a swap videos to the right people. Big names and liquidity could start looking. The other step will be to attract stables liquidity on the NoM, I don’t want to say airdrop, or farming, but I’m going to say it. Airdrop, and farming could be a logical path.
Is there any reason we need to call them wrapped? Since we can literally just call them usdc or usdt (same goes for btc obviously). Would prevent the bitter taste of “wrapping” which turns off some people