, 3 tweets, 1 min read Read on Twitter
.@willwarren89 let's say that relayers start sharing liquidity, but that some relayer(s) fork the 0x contract for whatever reason.

Is there any reason why the relayer who chose not to fork can't still share liquidity? If it's in her best interest, she should
1/ I don't see why should would not share post-fork if she did pre-fork? If she was before, and chooses not to now, she's choosing to shoot herself in the foot
2/ Perhaps it requires a bit more extra-protocol comms between relayers, but that seems like a manage-able problem

Also, I guess user signing message would be weird, but I'm pretty sure that can be abstracted (e.g. user signs two messages for conflicting formats in one action)
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to Kyle Samani
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls (>4 tweets) are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!