higher

Some hypotheses:
- It’s a real headless brand in all the ways Nouns failed: low entry point, shared upside, beautiful aesthetic, no treasury / grant culture.
- There are no big expectations (no L3, no tipping, etc). Just aesthetics and cocreation.
- The supply is fully distributed, and no immediate pump at launch.

Some valid points here:
- nouns does need low entry/shared upside
- agree w treasury/grant culture point.   needs to evolve but don’t see it as a flaw (eg 8 fig movie production)
- to give “proliferate nouns” meaning *is* the task at hand, wip
- hard disagree on distribution. no inflation is a critical flaw imo

We don’t need inflation. Just buy in and get upside, or earn in HIGHER.

Inflation introduces voting, grant culture, etc.

clicking @clicker (a @daylight ░░░░░░) | kylemccollom.com

imo you can’t forget earning. my thesis is that without a baked in mechanism to onboard and reward new participants (inflation/earning) you will eventually get a “pull the ladder up” / zero sum game dynamic.

No donations. 

Forget the earning (that’s minting with etc-20 for example) for now. 

Just people buying themselves to get upside.

Where will this supply of higher come from so new participants can contribute and earn? Relying on the goodwill of the people to donate seems v fragile long term.