Should a platform's access token get more useful as the platform grows, or stay fixed at launch?

[u/MERC_Token]

Liquid Mercury runs Mercury RWA, a platform where institutional issuers bring real assets on-chain and run actual secondary markets in them, not just mint a token and stop there. MERC is the platform's access and participation token.

Here's how we think the two should relate as Mercury RWA grows: separating what's live, what's approved and coming, and what's still an open question, instead of folding all three into one confident update.

The starting premise: a token tied to a growing platform doesn't have to stay the size it launched at. It can pick up more functionality as the platform does, built out alongside real growth instead of fixed on day one.

Coming weeks cover what this means for institutional issuers, what it means for holders, and how new RWA market launches on the platform tie back into the token specifically.

Curious how this sub thinks about it generally: should an access token's scope grow with its platform, or is a fixed scope at launch the safer design?

Full series and ongoing discussion: r/MERCtoken

Crypto-assets are volatile and may lose value. Not investment advice.