Hi all,
I am one of the advisors from Superfluid Foundation, and also co-founded the Superfluid. And I am also primarily responsible for SuperBoring’s smart contract.
A bit of background, on Base mainnet, we have processed over $4M in volume to date with 1000 active users per day (dune dashboard), and we expect an even higher volume on Arbitrum considering its DeFi friendliness.
However, maybe there is a misunderstanding here since it’s a bit surprising that it seems that using Arbitrum’s bridge is a privilege instead of a public good, as we hoped for.
To be clear, BORING is SuperBoring’s token on the mainnet, and we would like it to be bridged to Arbitrum unambiguously so that our users won’t be mistaken for other counterfeit “BORING” that might harm our users. For example, we have achieved it on Base mainnet “SB_TOKEN_ADDRESS=0x2112b92A4f6496B7b2f10850857FfA270464d054”
We consider such a function a public good and expect a low barrier to entry. Without such a service, we cannot deploy our service on Arbitrum because users cannot tell which Boring is canonical. This, our estimation, is a lose-lose situation for both arbitrum and SuperBoring as a product.
We appreciate Arbitrum’s DAO’s commitment to community alignment and ecosystem projects’ engagement; we may need need to assess the cost of such a requirement and plan differently. However, I want to clarify first: What is the minimum requirement for us to have a “canonical bridged” token for our product token?