you think having a native bridge would have been better?
Because it's 1-1, if the bridge goes down in super rare conditions, it's also over for the chain too.
that's my point, we already had ava downtime, i just can't follow your logic here tbh. I'd rather have a bridge with low fees that works all the time like multi but with native assets aswell Multi does not force anyone to use their receipts as stables, they could have used the antive asset USDC for example if it was present and have liquidity on both sides and if multi was down you'd have just used the other bridge
Обсуждают сегодня