The Cryptodate project has taken an inclusive approach to the multi-chain universe we now inhabit. Rather than trying to pick the winning horse, it has placed a bet on all the horses – and hopes they all are winners. The core smart contracts (ERC20, ERC721, Uniswap v2 LP, Uniswap staking) have been deployed to eight different blockchains, including the grandaddy (Ethereum), layer two (Arbitrum and Optimism) and several alt layer one chains (Polygon, BSC, Avalanche, Fantom, Moonriver). The rationale for this approach is multifactorial:
- Preemptive Strategy To Prevent Vampire Forks. Because all the contracts are open source, it would be trivial for someone to clone the project and deploy it to another smart chain.
- User Inclusivity. Each blockchain attracts and builds a different community. Rather than force a user to leave his/her preferred blockchain, we want to bring the project to them.
- Dapp Elegance. The front end dapp has been architected to seamlessly toggle between between blockchains. Just as Metamask and Sushiswap can point their UI to different blockchains, Cryptodate “just works” across chains.
Because of this multichain architecture, a question manifests itself around the philosophical and technical approach to bridges. The simple answer to the question is that there are not bridges between chains for the Cryptodate project, for both the ERC20 and ERC721 contracts. Again, the rationale is multifactorial:
- The purpose of the ERC20 token, CDT, is for governance of the chain it is deployed on. As such, it doesn’t make sense to move CDT between chains. For example, if users on the Avalanche chain wanted to increase the price to mint a cryptodate, it should be holders of CDT on the Avalanche chain that participate in that vote. It wouldn’t be right for CDT, earned on a different chain, to be brought over and influence that vote.
- The price of CDT is determined by the liquidity of that chain. Because the liquidity of CDT is directly tied to the purchase of cryptodates, it wouldn’t make sense for CDT to be arbitraged between chains. CDT is meant to stay on the chain where it was earned. It will be natural for CDT to be more valuable on chains where more dates have been minted and there is more user activity.
- Burning dates doesn’t make sense. Because a cryptodate represents an onchain date, burning it to transfer it to another chain would be like erasing time. Therefore, dates always stay on the chain they were minted on. Cryptodates are not burnable; once minted, they are forever seared onto that blockchain. A consequence of this architecture is that that the same date can be minted on different chains, a desirable outcome. If your birthday is already owned by someone on Ethereum, you can still get it on a different chain.
Leave a comment