We propose to make it possible for users to pay for transactions in $BOBA, if users have < .01 $ETH in their wallet. We believe this is useful because:
It allows users to avoid getting “stuck”, if they don’t have enough $ETH
It allows users to not need to hold $ETH to transact on Boba Network
It adds more immediate utility for using $BOBA on the Boba Network L2. If this is well received, we may propose to make $BOBA the fee token outright
I believe both Boba and ETH should be the fee token for the network. People who just want to use the network but not have to buy boba shouldnt feel forced, but boba token holders should be able to transact with their own boba
It’s a good proposal, but I think we just need to go full ape. My view on it. Looking at two prime examples: matic and metis. I think we should take a leap of faith and just go straight to making $BOBA the main fee token. There are probably enough reasons that ETH as a fee token is a solid option, but if we could make it as easy as possible for the end user to seamlessly switch some of their bridged funds to $BOBA.
For example:
-Give a new bridged user a “gas free” $BOBA faucet to claim. That will give them at least 2 interactions/transactions on boba.
-Make it very very simple for users to swap ether for boba. Make a big button on the gateway for all I care.
I know switching to a new fee model will take some adjustments, but sooner or later we are going to need to fully switch imo. If matic can do it, why can’t we make it even better for the end user. We have the biggest brains behind this project.
In terms of engineering, is there a significant difference in allowing for low ETH users to use BOBA versus allowing for anyone to use either for fees?
