I believe naming the potential new DEX pallet on the Statemint/Asset Hub parachain as “DOTSwap” would be very damaging for Polkadot and should be avoided at all costs. As Statemint’s name is likely being changed to “Asset Hub”, I’m proposing if this DEX does launch, it be called AssetHub DEX.
Although just a brand name, the DOTSwap brand is a massive risk for the ecosystem’s future. If you step back and think about this as a complete outsider (maybe a DeFi user on Solana or Arbitrum who has never used Polkadot), DOTSwap would make it feel like it’s supposed to be the go-to, state of the art DEX showcasing the best of Polkadot’s tech and where everyone should start when exploring Polkadot apps (which we all know is not the case).
It is very likely that, although this DEX is a Uniswap v1 (yes version 1) fork meant to be essentially backend infra for bringing more liquidity to Polkadot and not compete with DEXs on parachains, this DOTSwap brand will set high expectations the DEX and has a big risk of setting up users for a letdown and poor experience given the outdated tech, only having DOT pairs, etc. It also runs the risk of people using the DEX and demanding upgrades and better DEX tech (wen Uni v3), which then competes with the DEX appchains (HydraDX, Mangata, etc) and DEXs on parachains like StellaSwap, Interlay, or Acala.
It all goes back to the basics of crypto communities: a vast majority of people in the Polkadot community are only here for the DOT token, not the tech. More people hold DOT than any other parachain token, people hold DOT because they want it to appreciate in value, and those same people are the ones who want “DOTSwap” because they think it will help their DOT bags. Uncoincidentally, the 160 people who voted in the Twitter poll for branding the DEX even included their favorite token in the name of this new DEX because it’s the most likely brand name to help their DOT bags.
Similar to how Statemint is likely getting rebranded to “Asset hub”, I feel it would be best if we downplay this DEX as much as possible, make it feel like the infrastructure that it’s intended to be, and not brand it as if it’s a real DEX, especially not branding it as THE Polkadot DEX, which DOTSwap absolutely does. Something boring like “AssetHub DEX” would be more suitable. The fact the brand was chosen as the correct path by the people spearheading this initiative came from a random Twitter poll with 160 votes is also unbelievable but that’s beside the point.
I’m mostly worried DOTSwap would be “Polkadot.js 2.0” - imo, Polkadot.js and the lack of attention to app-layer UX single-handedly ruined Polkadot’s initial phase of industry-wide user interest where you usually only get once chance then they’re gone. And now with “DOTSwap” we’d run the risk of setting users up for failure again rather than promoting the parachain product ecosystem.
In summary, let’s scrap the DOTSwap brand to protect the Polkadot ecosystem’s reputation and go with a more boring brand like AssetHub DEX.
Does anyone agree/disagree? What are your thoughts? Thank you for reading and adding your views. This is meant to start a discussion and I’d love to hear valid points for keeping this brand name.
Note: here is the original forum thread on this topic: https://forum.polkadot.network/t/statemint-update-roadmap/
Note 2: This post is only related to the DOTSwap brand, not whether the DEX should launch at all.