MISO itself is a nice addition to the sushi-project, given quality projects that already had their minimal initial sushi offering. I can totally see that is viable, especially in the way it is setup as a separate entity from sushi-swap for marketing it by itself, but still integrated into the same ecosystem, fueling volume etc. I might become a go to stop, for launching projects.
What gives me a bit of a hard time, is the apparent desire to open it up without restriction. It even is on of the supposed selling points.
My concern is that this will make bad publicity, in the realistic event that 95% of projects being launched are not a worthwhile investment. Just an assumption, given the fact that MISO will make it easier to launch new tokens, even without much of a prior conviction to anything from the creators. At least that’s my understanding.
So the concrete questions I would like find answers for:
Is my understanding correct, to open up with unrestricted access?
Will it lead to a lot of crap being listed?
Why open it up completely and not have a people vote for inclusion of projects?
Why not keep on curating the hosted projects like it is done now? I see that it would take effort which may be a good reason to not keep it up, but still. Would like to know.
How will one be able to search for projects that have a plausible claim to become valuable. I see that it’s still early, but have there been concepts evaluated how to assess quality of listed projects?
Could there be a net negative effect?
I guess I could also just wait and see what happens…
Thanks for reading